The Eclectic Cleric

Next stop, Sox? Or Celtics?

2009-08-03T12:41:00.003-04:00

Here's the latest post White House Brew Fest UPDATE from "Skip" Gates, speaking from his summer place on the Vineyard. Funny the little things that bring us together. This whole situation has me reflecting back on my first few encounters with law enforcement officers in my youth, and discovering that little things like the fact that I was an Associated Student Body Officer at my High School didn't really cut it much during a traffic stop, and that in retrospect mentioning it at all simply seemed stupid and naive. Or hearing from my cousin (a sworn officer and retired Sgt. of Detectives in Spokane) that probably the most antagonistic thing you can say to a cop is "I Know MY Rights!" (when the BEST thing to do would be to remember that you have the Right to Remain Silent, and to use it); or hearing from my wife (an administrative law judge and former trial lawyer) about the seven-figure damages award granted by a jury to an African American airport traffic cop who asked a wealthy white physician to move his car, only to have the latter threaten him personally and refuse to comply on account of the differences in their incomes (and one assumes, their race, social class, and relative importance), and then was hit by the fender of the physician's vehicle as the officer reached for his ticket book, and the doctor angrily pulled back into traffic.... Gosh I wish I could remember more of the details of THAT case. Meanwhile, here's all best wishes for smooth sailing from now on for both Officer Crowley and Professor Gates. Now, about Harvard....

Report from the Rose Garden

2009-07-31T12:45:00.005-04:00

This just in. Professor Gates enjoyed a Samuel Adams Light, while President Obama opted for a Bud Light. Sergeant Crowley indulged in a Blue Moon Pale Ale, while Vice-President Biden contented himself with a "near-beer," Buckler. I'm not certain that their beverage choices really give us much insight into issues of race, class, and police power/authority in our society. But they do perhaps provide some small insight into the personality of each individual.

Sam's Light is, to my taste, probably the best light beer being commercially brewed in America today. Samuel Adams is a growing regional brewery based in Boston, and produces a wide variety of ales, lagers, and seasonal brews, all of which are of high quality. "Skip" Gate's selection of Sam's Light is the educated choice of a calorie-conscious connaiseur, and is admirable in that regard.

Bud Light, on the other hand, is simply piss. Not even Clydesdale horse-piss (which all needs to be reserved for the regular Budweiser), but rather something that came out of a Dalmation after a long, leisurely lope through middle America. Although to be fair to Anheuser-Busch, they do produce very clever advertising...about half the time. The other half they are just down-right annoying. But Barach's choice of a Bud Light shows him as attempting to show himself as a "man of the people," who really understands what a beer or two (or twelve or twenty...) after work can really mean.

Blue Moon is a very respectable Cambridge microbrewery with a brewpub (as I recall) right in Harvard Square. The Sarge really knows his suds, plus he works out often enough that he doesn't have to worry about a few extra calories. As for the Vice-President's choice, I kinda wish he'd gone for something a little more in the line of a Raspberry Lemonade, rather than following the near-beer route. Although maybe now thanks to his example I'm going to have to try a Buckler's myself, just to see what it's like. This is, after all, BBQ season. And there's nothing like a cold brew on a hot day with a freshly-grilled brat in hand.

All in all, I think this was a very nice gesture on the part of the President. And I'm glad to hear that Skip and Jim are planning to do this again on their own. Who knows, this could turn out to be a regular Thursday afternoon event at Grendel's Den? And we could ALL probably learn something from that....

IPA or PBR?

2009-07-25T17:44:00.004-04:00

Now here's a little breaking news that should make just about everyone just a little happier. And it will probably end up just being a Bud....

Louis Gates and Walter Begaye

2009-07-24T10:28:00.008-04:00

And what do THESE two cases have in common? Not much (actually) which is a whole other issue, but not really what I wanted to write about this morning.

I sure wish everyone would just accept the last word on this incident, which is that it was unfortunate and regrettable, that apologies are doubtlessly due all around, and that it's time to move on, without necessarily ignoring the underlying issues which this incident has once again raised.

I wish people (Professor Gates in particular) would acknowledge that the ONLY reason the police were at his door that day was to protect his life and his property. I wish Professor Gates could acknowledge that he was tired, that he was perhaps hypersensitive (I know I will be criticized for the use of that word) to the deeper social implications of this encounter, and that he did indeed lose his temper and behave in a disorderly manner, whether or not it was truly worthy of his arrest. I ALSO wish people could acknowledge the underlying Class issues of this incident: that Professor Gates clearly attempted to use his perceived position of privilege within the Harvard community in order to intimidate Sgt. Crowley, and that this tactic didn't really go over very well, and never does.

As for Sgt Crowley, I suppose it would have been easy enough for him to walk away after seeing Gates' ID in the kitchen, with a quick apology for interrupting his day, and wishes for a good night's sleep. The fact that he didn't is in itself a clue that there was more going on there than meets the eye, but I doubt that underlying personal racism had anything to do with it.

Finally, I really like Chalice Chick's analysis of this entire situation, especially her early tongue-in-cheek advice that "Unless you’re Stephen L. Carter, be nice to the cops anytime you interact with them." I mean, let's face it: it doesn't really matter who you are, it is ALWAYS a bad idea to get into an argument with someone wearing a uniform, carrying a badge, and in possession of a loaded firearm.

Meanwhile, let us not forget that my friend Walter Begaye just spent two months of HIS life in jail (without trial) on a bogus weapons charge, and for the "crime" of being a drunken Indian sitting in the wrong place with the wrong person at the wrong time. Nough said?

"That's one small step..."

2009-07-22T18:11:00.009-04:00

`

and then another, and another after that, and another and another and pretty soon don't you know it but you're walking. I've always loved this "Earthrise" photo -- I've used it as a meditation mandala, and as a central focal point for a meditation altar, and have always found lurking near it both a strong source of inspiration, and also a sense of cautionary humility. For millennia humanity has been gazing up at the night sky to contemplate the vast infinity of which we are such a small and unintrusive portion. And then, for a brief moment in history some four decades ago, a handful of lucky individuals had the opportunity like Prometheus to ride the stolen fire once more into the heavens for a God's eye view of our tiny island in the vast darkness. And the outcome, if anything, is even MORE humbling than the view from around our solitary, stone age campfires.

Mount Rainier finally had the good manners to peek its nose out on my last full day at Camano. I've already mentioned how invigorating and rejuvenating those two weeks were, and I just wish there could have been a few more of them...maybe toward the end of the summer, after I've had a little more opportunity to settle in here in Sacto and get myself unpacked. Had my first visit with my new Doctors today (more on that later), and there's certainly much awaiting me there. And the unpacking, of course, always goes more slowly that anticipated. If I'm LUCKY I'll be fully unpacked and moved in by the end of October, just in time for my 53rd birthday.

Drove down to Portland Friday with my son Jacob's fiancee Shelly, who had already driven to Seattle earlier that morning to obtain an expedited passport so that they can elope to Italy the week after next. But of course in the process of developing this wonderful plan, they discovered that it's a lot harder to get married in Italy than they thought, so now the plan is simply to go to Italy, and then get married at some later date back here in the States. I don't know what it is about my family. Margie and I essentially eloped to Atlanta back in 1985, while Steph and Craig have actually been married for months (for insurance purposes involving the baby), but put off having an actual public ceremony and reception until now. We all seem to enjoy the party part (when it finally happens), and the chance to get together with friends we otherwise might not see so often, but we are also all basically of the opinion that a big, fancy wedding is a huge waste of money that might well better have been spent on something else.

"Steph-n-Jen" -- my joined-at-the-hip daughters by mutual discernment. Looks like they may have picked up a new admirer.

In any event, as someone who at one point in his life earned a significant portion of his livelihood by officiating at weddings, I knew better than to offer any advice or make any critiques of the Judge who actually officiated at both the ceremony last Saturday and the earlier one down at the courthouse some months ago. And as a professional, I LOVE large weddings, think I do a pretty amazing job when it comes to "solemnizing" them, and always used to consider the big party afterwards as part of my compensation (although even just 5% of that in cash would have generally been more than satisfactory). Weddings, Child Dedications, and Memorial Services -- those sacerdotal milestones by which clergy share the lives of their people, regardless of their specific faith tradition.

Meanwhile, we were confronted with a little mystery Sunday morning: "the decapitation of Saint Frank." One of Margie's garden statues had its head go missing at some point during the weekend, while we were all off celebrating the union of Steph-n-Craig. The head was eventually recovered, but the culprit is still at large; meanwhile, this reminds me of one of Steph's favorite cartoons growing up, of a monk walking out of a devestated barroom, beaten-up bodies littering every broken chair and table, while the caption reads "After that, no one dared call Francis a Sissy again."

Flew down to Sacramento Sunday night, and was picked up by my Dad at the airport here right on time. As I mentioned earlier, still plenty of details to be worked out about unpacking and the like -- Debra and Jerry are in the process of moving into a new house they purchased about a year and a half ago only a few miles from here, while most of my things are still in storage waiting to space to open up here. And I truly am guessing it could easily be another month or more before I'm really unpacked and up to speed.

In the meantime though, I have new doctors and I have a new view, plus clean clothes, a comfortable bed, a functional desk (and internet connection!), and even a new dog! Well, not exactly, but the next best thing -- a calico cat named "Lou Lou" who belongs to my father, who dotes on her shamelessly, and provides us all with hours of fascinating entertainment.

When she's not sleeping, that is....

[cross-posted from One Day Isle]
.

"A Perfect, Whole, Healed World."

2009-07-21T22:13:00.002-04:00

Hurray for Mary Harrington, minister emerita of the UU Church in Winchester MA and this year's preacher at the Service of the Living Tradition in Salt Lake City last month. This is part of a much longer post that originally appeared on the UUMA chat, and was later reposted (with permission) at Kim Hampton's East of Midnight blog. And I'm reprinting this last paragraph here because, quite frankly, I COULDN'T have said it better myself, and it's a message that is well worth hearing. So thank you Mary, again and again and again, not just for your willingness to speak the truth in love to power, but for your ability to speak up on behalf of the rest of us who feel as though maybe we have lost our voices, or that people are just sick and tired of listening....

"...One reason you might not hear as much about people’s physical needs and struggles as exists is because of the high price involved in speaking up and then not being heard or helped, being ignored, being pitied, being condescended to or patronized, being accused of costing others too much money/being too expensive, being impatient, being fawned over or its opposite- having others refuse to even see you’re there or make eye contact- I have experienced all of these from my colleagues, from other ministers, not just ordinary citizens. It can be awkward, embarrassing, insulting, offensive, infuriating, heartbreaking or humiliating, depending on the situation. It doesn’t make you want to go back for more. I’m saying this now, out loud, so you can’t say you didn’t know, from now on. And because I don’t want to say it again, I don’t want to have to say it again, even though I know that’s not realistic or even fair, it’s still what I want. A perfect, whole, healed world."

Yours always, Mary

Bastille Day

2009-07-14T12:05:00.000-04:00

And thanks to James Ishmael Ford for posting this clip: one of my favorite film moments in one of my all time favorite movies ever. Vive la France indeed!

Monkey Mind: Briefest Rumination on the 14th of July

The French Revolution had some small impact of the emerging Unitarian movement in the United States. That famous "Unitarian by Myself"-- Thomas Jefferson -- was very closely tied ideologically to the French Republicans in the minds of many, while many expatriate French aristocrats somehow found their way to the South Shore of Boston, where they were often taken under the wing of the soon-to-be Unitarian congregations there. Don't ask me why, or how significant this really was. Just something I stumbled over in the course of my research

Monkey Mind: Who is a Christian? Musing on Universalism and What it Means to Me and What it Can Mean to Unitarian Universalism

2009-06-27T11:39:00.000-04:00

Monkey Mind: Who is a Christian? Musing on Universalism and What it Means to Me and What it Can Mean to Unitarian Universalism

What's in a name?

2009-06-27T10:55:00.004-04:00

Thought I'd reply to something James Ishmael Ford wrote over at Monkey Mind.

But rather than launching into a long discourse about the respective aromas of roses and turds (cf. Romeo and Juliet II, ii, 1-2), I thought I'd simply observe that sometimes it seems to me as though "We UUs" make much too big a deal about what we call ourselves.

Or shall I say, how we label ourselves. Brand ourselves.

Most Protestant traditions deriving (on some level) from the Anglican tradition have taken their names from a distinctive form of ecclesiastical polity (Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, the "Society of Friends"), or something distinctive about their liturgical practice (Methodist, Baptist. "Quaker"), or simply taken on the name "Christian" as a generic marker of their shared faith tradition.

But Unitarianism, Universalism, and "Unitarian-Universalism TM" are all derived quite specifically from two distinctive (and heretical) theological doctrines: the belief that God is One, and that ALL Souls shall ultimately be reconciled to their Creator.

Which, lets face it, are both great doctrines, even though I doubt few of us these days give them much thought in ouir live-a-day lives.

But then comes Grammar, and those dreaded hyphens. Typically in English the adjective precedes the noun, but this is not always the case. Are/were we, actually: Universalists who also believe in a Unitarian Christology? Unitarians who believe in a Universalist Soteriology? Both at the same time, and freethinking Christian heretics to boot? Some sort of other deeply-hyphenated (and profoundly personal) amalgam of adjectives (say "Unitarian-Universalist Pagan Feminist Vegan Taoists), however we might chose to identify ourselves in public or in private?

And then there are the ever-more-clever "Jewnitarians," "Unipalians," and "Smorgasborgians?" Is it still possible to be JUST a Unitarian or a Universalist any more? And what if a few of us decided on our own simply to scramble things up for awhile, by becoming "The Association of Universalists and Unitarians" (or AUU/U&Us for short)?

And then there is always the Christian piece. And the question of whether we are trying to describe ourselves individually, or our movement as a whole: theologically, or historically, or institutionally. Are we a sect, a cult, a liberal protestant denomination, or perhaps even our own "new religion?" (and how do these things differ from one another?)

Or in the alternative, are we basically still "Enlightened Puritans" who believe in Freedom, Reason, and Tolerance?

This is WAY too complicated for my poor little head. I think I'm going to go pray about it for awhile....

Theodore Parker's destructive legacy....

2009-05-28T22:45:00.003-04:00

Why did Theodore Parker die? He died prematurely worn out through this enormous activity, -- a warning, as well as an example.... Had he been a mere student, this had been less destructive. But to take the standard of study of a German professor, and superadd to that the separate exhaustions of a Sunday preacher, a lyceum lecturer, a radical leader, and a practical philanthropist was simply to apply half a dozen distinct suicides to the abbreviation of a single life. And as his younger companions had long assured him, the tendency of his career was not only to kill himself, but them; for each assumed that he must at least attempt what Theodore Parker accomplished.... [Thomas Wentworth Higginson]

There were quite a few 19th century Unitarian ministers whose exhausting work was felt to have contributed to their premature demise, Joseph Stevens Buckminster and Henry Ware Jr. to name only two. But Parker's persona as a constitutionally robust child of farmers was a sharp contrast to the frail, "spiritual" ectomorphic body-types generally associated with piety in that era.

More to the point though is Higginson's observation that for many of the generation of clergy who followed Parker, the challenge of his accomplishments as Preacher and Abolitionist Reformer, Scholar, Lecturer, "Practical Philanthropist" (a reference to Parker's active involvement in hands-on public/pastoral ministry as well his more radical political involvement), and general all-around busybodyness set an impossibly high standard, while implicitly encouraging neglect of many of the more run-of-the-mill institutional duties of parish ministry.

Yet even recognizing this, we still admire him to this day as one of the "Three Prophets" of Religious Liberalism. We point to the 28th Congregational Society as some sort of great institutional success, the 19th century equivalent of the modern Megachurch, and...

Let me just say this. There's a lot more to "the Golden Age of Unitarianism" that Parker, Emerson, and Channing. But most of us seem hard pressed even to understand them in their context. And so we find ourselves trapped by a form of idolatry, flirting with "half a dozen distinct suicides" as we attempt to minister effectively in our time and place based on a false knowledge of our past, and a mistaken understanding of our real charge.

And yes, I still adore Theodore Parker....

My Vote for Laurel Hallman

2009-05-27T19:06:00.002-04:00

...as if anyone really cares.

I don't know either of these candidates especially well personally, although over nearly thirty years of ministry (Laurel and I were by coincidence ordained on the exact same day in 1981) my life has crossed paths with Laurel's on several occasions. We are mutual friends of mutual friends, and I know her by reputation to be an outstanding and thoughtful religious leader. To my knowledge, Peter's and my paths have never crossed (although apparently he discovered UUism in Eugene Oregon in the mid-nineties, at exactly the same time I was completing my PhD there. But for some reason we never met personally). He certainly has many strong supporters among my friends in the PNWD, which is to his credit I'm sure. And I also believe that the issues he has identified as crucial -- radical hospitality and ministerial formation -- are the right ones, and will be priorities for whoever is elected next.

But here's the thing for me. When I look at Laurel's resume I see someone with three decades of solid experience in the ministry, and who has literally given her entire adult life in service to our movement. She has successfully served two very different churches, been a Berry Street essayist and the Living Tradition preacher, and served on more boards, committees, commissions, whatever than I can comfortably count. Perhaps most importantly (and I say this as an historian of our movement who was also there to witness with my own eyes), her work with Harry Scholefield on "Living By Heart" was one of the earliest, most influential, and perhaps even the single most important catalyst for the renewal of interest in All Things Spiritual among Unitarian Universalists.

Peter, by contrast, was only first discovering Unitarian Universalism at the moment Laurel was helping to profoundly change its face. After a year or two in the pews he headed off for seminary, and since then has successfully served the same church -- twice -- with a brief (and somewhat mysterious, at least to me) interlude at 25 in between. He's clearly an attractive and compelling speaker, who is capable of inspiring great loyalty in the people who hear him. And he has carefully positioned himself as the "outsider" candidate, who is going to bring to our movement new ideas from outside the box that are going to transform it into whatever it needs to be in order to thrive in the next century.

But I guess I'm just old school enough to think that the last thing we really need right now is more new ideas from outside the box. For too long I've watched our denomination chase after this "latest thing" and the next, every one of which is going to be "just the thing" to grow us to relevance and thus expand the impact and influence of our values and principles. But I'm not even certain that's the right problem, much less the best course. Instead, I feel what we really need is a leader who truly understands the heart and soul of our movement, not only at this moment in history, but throughout its history. Once again, Peter is certainly capable of saying all of the same right things so many of us have been thinking and saying for years (that we are not a social club, or a political party for instance). But Laurel "gets it" in a way and on a level that is difficult to put into words...although in my opinion she has certainly done so very effectively, over and over and over again.

That's why she won my vote. As if anyone really cares....

My Cyber-Stalker

2009-05-12T09:26:00.004-04:00

Shortly after the Presidential Election, I drew the attention of a notorious U*U blogger (Robin Edgar, the so-called "Emerson Avenger") for posting this image on my blog, and comparing it to (among other things) a Phoenix rising from the ashes. Robin accused me of stealing my idea from him (which, I hope it goes without saying, I didn't) without giving him "credit where credit is due" (apparently, the truly important consideration in his mind), and then later (after I tried to defend myself) called me a plagiarist and "the Klepto Cleric," accused me of "conduct unbecoming a minister," and generally began to heap abuse upon me every chance he got (which was quite frequently, since he apparently has a lot of time on his hands).

Finally, when I got tired of the whole business and tried to disengage, I made the mistake of quoting an old folk saying I first heard from my grandmother: "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk. You both end up stinking, but the skunk LIKES it." Robin took to that like...well, like a skunk to a pissing match, frankly...now he routinely warns his victims to stock up on tomato juice because when he's finished with them they'll need it!

But here's my point and my request. Robin is obviously free to write whatever he likes on his own blogs, and good for him if it keeps him off the streets, out of trouble and out of harm's way. But for God's sake, PLEASE will people stop linking to his site, publishing his comments, and allowing him to gain greater exposure for his slander and abuse than he can gather on his own! All the high-falutin' arguments about "a free and responsible search" notwithstanding, all you are doing is contributing to his hateful, hurtful campaign of lies and abuse. You're not doing him any good, and you're not making our movement smell too sweet either.

I also feel compassion for Robin, and all the things he's apparently suffered...but believe me, helping him to inflict that same hurt on others is NOT the appropriate, compassionate, humanitarian thing to do. So please, PLEASE, PLEASE! just cut him off, right now, today, Cold Turkey, and maybe we can begin to put an end to this long, international nightmare....

BTW & FWI, here are the links to MY ORIGINAL NOVEMBER 17 POST, along with the COMMENT ON CHRISTINE ROBINSON'S BLOG that Robin claims I stole. So setting aside the fact that I hadn't even seen this comment until Robin brought it to my attention, you can decide for yourself whether Robin's accusations of "plagiarism" are really supportable. And then maybe the entire blogosphere will start to stink just a little bit less.

Theodore Parker, the Great American Preacher

2009-05-09T22:11:00.006-04:00

born August 24, 1810 - Lexington, Massachusetts.
died May 10, 1860 - Florence Italy.

Lest we forget, both the Parker birth bicentennial and the Parker death sesquicentennial are coming up next summer. Might make for an interesting opportunity to reassess the impact his inspiration and influence have had on our movement. But until then, enjoy these:

The English Cemetery in Florence

The Grave of Theodore Parker

Yes, that's me standing in the rain next to Parker's headstone in Florence, Spring 2000

WARRIORS AND PRIESTS (II)

2009-04-29T15:51:00.002-04:00

from The Professional Soldier, by Morris Janowitz (1960)

Military officers frequently made reference to linkage between their profession and the ministry. One Army colonel, when asked about the gratifications of military life, said: “It is not too different from priesthood or ministry in serving a cause.” In a letter a retired naval captain wrote to his son, which was widely distributed, the analogy is spelled out in detail:

The naval profession is much like the ministry. You dedicate your life to a purpose. You wear the garb of an organized profession. Your life is governed by rules laid down by the organizations. You renounce your pursuit of wealth. In a large measure you surrender your citizenship; renounce politics; work for the highest good of the organization. In the final analysis, your aims and object are quite as moral as any minister’s because you are not seeking your own good, but the ultimate good of your country. You train the men under you to be good and useful citizens, and, like the minister, what you say must conform to the rules of the organization.

It has not been unusual for a young man to have made a decision as to whether he would enter the ministry or the military. In the United States, and more often in Europe, sons of clergy have frequently taken up a military career. Conversely, officers who resigned from the military have found in the clergy an expression of their desire to “do service and perform in the name of a great cause.”

***

These ancient archetypes: the hunter and the shaman, the warrior and the priest, have been at the heart of human society since before civilization or recorded history. Only motherhood is arguably an older "profession." In an earlier post I suggested that there was potentially a great deal that clergy could learn about their vocation by studying the leadership experiences of commissioned military officers. So it's interesting to discover that this scrutiny has occurred in the other direction as well, and that military commanders are looking to religious and spiritual leaders in order to better understand the challenges facing them when leading soldiers in combat.

And at some point this will probably be worthy of a much longer post. But for now I just observe that Schaller's book is about 25 years old now, and Janowitz's more than 50. A lot of things have changed in both the military and the ministry in that time. Yet with such ancient archetypes, the fundamentals endure, and continue to be illuminating. What do other folks see here? Is this really a worthy line of inquiry leading to profound insight? Or am I just way off base here, without a lot of foundation or support?

LYLE SCHALLER ON “CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS” (I)

2009-04-03T09:09:00.005-04:00

***

The words below are some twenty-five years old now; they were first published in 1984, the year I completed my internship at University Unitarian Church in Seattle and was called to my first settled ministry in Midland, Texas. The book itself had its moment of attention mostly because of Schaller's early discussion of the ways in which congregational size helps dictate congregational culture and thus effective ministerial strategies. Schaller called them "Cats, Collies, Gardens and Ranches" to differentiate between what we would now call the Family, Pastoral, Program and Corporate-sized churches. And it was all the rage in the circles I ran with, in much the same way that Alice Mann is now.

But for some reason, it was these other words of Schaller's tht really struck a lasting chord with me, and although now I am much more curious about the DIFFERENCES between these two vocations, the haunting similarities (especially around issues like the mission comes first, leading by example, the connection between discipline and discipleship, and the distinctive "cultures" of both professions) have stuck with me, and return to mind often in the on-going discussion in our denomination about ministerial recruitment, formation, education and settlement. And the challenge of "careerism" continues to plague us as well, especially with the loss of real ecclesiastical knowledge by the laity, and the surge of second-career individuals into the profession.

That being said, I have a great deal of admiration and respect for the many talents of my colleagues, who come from such different backgrounds and yet all bring significant gifts to share in ministry to our people and our theological movement. In the meantime, I now find myself reflecting upon my quarter-century evolution from naive and idealistic young mystic to curmudgeonly old fart. And I find myself wondering what the next quarter-century may bring, disappointed in the knowledge that I probably won't be around to see it with my own eyes....

For those ministerial readers who are affronted by the suggestion that the churches can learn from research about military organizations, it may be useful to reflect on a few of the parallels between the ordained clergy and the commissioned officer corps. Historically, both have occupied what the rest of society perceived as a distinctive office, both have a custom of wearing special garb, both place a great emphasis on titles and rank and the garb often reflects title and rank. Both have relied on their own special training schools to prepare candidates for that vocation and in both cases entrance into the profession has been controlled by the graduates, not by the general public. Until recently compulsory chapel was a part of the daily routine in these training schools. Both draw most of their administrators and teachers from those within that vocation. Both have a tradition of a special commissioning or ordination ceremony following graduations that includes the taking of an oath or vow by the candidate. Both are seen as “set apart” vocations and the families of the practitioners are very conscious of this. Historically, both have assumed that induction into that vocation was for a lifetime, or at least until retirement. (In both vocations the current generation of new entrants places less weight on that tradition than did previous generations. Increasingly both are becoming entry points into the secular labor force.) In both, the tradition has been that the needs of the cause, rather than the preferences of the individual, determined placement. In both vocations the practitioner, at an early age, had many firsthand encounters with death. In both vocations the handicap of a comparatively low salary was offset by perquisites of office, womb-like care from entrance to death, the mutual support of the brotherhood, the feeling that one was responding to a calling rather than simply “making a living,” a sense of service to the public and a pension following retirement. (In both cases those now responsible for paying pensions are beginning to show signs of rebellion.)

In both professions the wife was expected to be the husband’s helpmate, but celibacy was encouraged. Both have a long tradition of employer-owned housing, transfers at the convenience of the institution, special tax advantages, and an expectation that many practitioners will serve in foreign lands. Both vocations have a distinctive jargon, a tradition of in-house jokes, a code of ethics, a professional association, an assumption of peer group rather than outside evaluation, and special orders for the elite within the profession. Both place a great weight on graduate degrees and credentials in placement. Civilians have been expected to accord special deference to those in these vocations, ut both have experienced a substantial erosion of these deference patterns in recent years. Both have a long history of an elite office cadre who are presumed to possess certain mystical qualities. There are distinctive titles (bishop, general, admiral) for those at the top of the deference and command pyramid. The tradition that “rank has its privileges” is part of the reward system for those at the top of the hierarchy. In both vocations there is a long tradition of the oldest son following in the father’s footsteps. Both have long traditions of naming buildings after distinguished members of that vocation. What is sometimes referred to as the “ecclesiastical escalator” has its counterpart in the military. Both have a long tradition that subordinates have an obligation of loyalty to senior officials that often must override personal inclinations. Both have been experiencing an erosion of the belief that if they are loyal to the system, the system will take care of them when they are too old to be contributing members.

Finally, both are vulnerable to the blight of “careerism,” of placing the future career and well being of the individual ahead of the cause.

Lyle E. Schaller, Looking in the Mirror: Self-Appraisal in the Local Church, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984), pp. 56-8.

Spilling the Beans

2009-03-29T22:10:00.004-04:00

This morning was the kick-off of our annual Stewardship Campaign: four homilies from the four members of our ministerial "team" -- myself, the Minister of Music, and the two part-time ministers who were brought in to support me after I was diagnosed with cancer. That may sound like an awful lot of preaching, but it actually worked out magnificently...and without much advanced coordination between us either. Of course, today's service was really merely the mid-point of what has already been about six weeks worth of warm-up: planning, testimonials, the recruitment and training of visiting stewards, the preparation and mailing of our written materials, and (of course) the all-church fellowship event on Saturday night: an old-fashioned Bean Supper complete with corny entertainment and home-made pie. And now we can still look forward to another three to four weeks of home visits and face to face conversations, after which we should know how close we are to reaching our goal in these challenging economic circumstances.

As now both a part-timer and a short-termer myself, I haven't really paid that much attention to the finer details of the campaign this year. I don't even know what our canvass goal is, much less how likely we are to reach it based on our historical pledge numbers. I do know that the value of our endowment is down by about 30%, and have spoken personally with four different people who have either lost or left their jobs in the past few weeks. But I've also been told that we potentially have as many as sixty new pledgers this year, and this alone could easily make all the difference between success and disappointment. It's hard to say. There has been so much energy and good feeling around the church, really since the moment I arrived here two years ago, notwithstanding my eventual illness and diagnosis six months into this ministry. The way the members of this congregation rallied around me (and one another) was an authentic "George Bailey moment," and has both inspired and empowered a lot of people to get involved in ways they hadn't been involved with the church before. Attendance has been strong, with lots of first-time visitors every Sunday. So all those signs are very good.

But at the same time, the economic downturn has really put a damper on a lot of the things we dreamed of doing here. When I was candidating here two years ago, the air was filled with big plans for real estate expansion and partnerships with local arts, educational, and social justice organizations, and a much more visible footprint here at the head of Temple Street. Now it feels as if everyone is just hunkering down, and waiting to see how dark it's going to get before the dawn. And that, of course, has nothing to do with MY illness; it's just the sad and shameful legacy of eight years of plundering by the Bushies and their cronies. Meanwhile, now that my decision not to return here in the fall is public news, I'm starting to hear from all of the people for whom my ministry has made a big difference in their lives, who are sorry to see me going, who wish that I could stay, who tell me in just so many words what a huge inspiration I've been for them personally, and how much I have done for the church in such a short time. And naturally, it's hard for me to hear all that without beginning to second-guess myself, and falling into that trap of thinking that I'm indispensable, that no one can possibly do this job as well as I can, that by leaving now and denying this church the benefit of my vision, my experience, my enthusiasm, devotion and general excellence, I am in some way "leaving them in the lurch."

And whenever I start to feel this way, I just need to remind myself that we all THINK we're indispensable, but none of us really are, and that the fact that my departure may very well be setting them back a decade or more (as someone recently suggested to me) really means very little to a congregation which measures its lifespan in centuries. I'm proud of whatever I've been able to accomplish in my all-too-brief time here; I wish it could have been longer (as I think everyone does), but God-Providence-Destiny-the Universe had a different plan both for me and for them, and that's just the way it's got to be. And that's my mantra. None of us would have wished for this, and we can all mourn the loss of "what might have been." And I will miss them too once I'm gone. But let's take THIS time to say goodbye, and celebrate the time we had together, rather than squandering it with regret.

And if I ever find myself feeling TOO nostalgic, I just need to remind myself of these abominable Maine winters....

Meanwhile, if you are interested in what a minister in my situation might have to say to their congregation at Stewardship time, here are links to both my Stewardship Packet letter and my Sunday Morning kick-off homily. Enjoy!

Stewardship Letter
Stewardship Homily

Monkey Mindfulness

2009-03-26T20:47:00.007-04:00

[Over at Monkey Mind, Providence Rhode Island minister James Ishmael Ford is writing about the role Joseph Campbell played in the renewal of the "spiritual" aspects of our Unitarian Universalist faith tradition. Here's a copy of the comment I posted there, which I'm posting here as well simply because it's such an easy thing to do.]

In 1978 I wrote my Senior Honors thesis at the University of Washington on Joseph Campbell's The Masks of God (a document now thankfully forever lost to posterity). The following year at HDS I continued to pursue those interests through coursework in Buddhism and the Buddhist/Christian dialogue, The Interpretation of Religious Experience, and James Fowler's theories of Faith Development.

My point is that even then -- a decade before the Moyers interviews -- some of us had already picked up on the idea of Unitarian Universalism as a "reasonable mysticism" -- a faith tradition which had grounded itself in science, "natural theology" and the other intellectual tools of the Enlightenment, but was still open to non-rational (as opposed to irrational) ways of knowing, and had a rich heritage of intuitive, "mystical" knowledge as well, "peak experiences" (in Maslow's terms) which could be described phenomenologically, and even recreated with some reliability through the use of certain kinds of time-tested techniques and practices.

Perry Miller's famous essay "From Jonathan Edwards to Emerson" makes almost this exact same point about Unitarianism's Enlightened Puritans and their Transcendentalist offspring, who looked back to their grandparents in order to re-embrace the emotional and spiritual intensity of that spirit-filled world. Finally, the work of (UU - although I didn't know it at the time) Frederick Streng on "Emptiness," along with the theories of German Sociologist of Religion Ernst Troeslsch (a major influence on James Luther Adams) about "Church," "Sect" and "Mysticism" as the three building blocks of Christian communities, helped me to pull a lot of these pieces together, at least in my own mind.

Our UU churches are places set apart (like a sect) from the rest of the world, where we can come to safely explore more deeply within ourselves (mysticism), and then return to the world with a redemptive, sacramental gift of grace (the Church) which has the power to transform the world....a cycle which (not coincidentally) exactly parallels Campbell's Heroic Journey. Anyway, that's how I learned it at Harvard, 30 years ago. Do you think I ought to ask for my tuition back?

Swept Up By History -- Overwhelmed By Emotion

2009-01-28T14:02:00.002-05:00

And good riddance to the Bushies! It's just so hard to describe how I feel about this transition of power. Eight years ago I witnessed Dubya accepting Gore's concession in front of the Texas State Legislature, and then leaving that building and stepping into a motorcade of Black SUVs...and in my gut I just knew that it was wrong, wrong, wrong... And now, eight years later, a very different Bush -- gray-haired, broken, pathetic -- leaves the Capitol by helicopter to return to Texas, with one last sentimental fly-over the White House before whatever awaits him next, which in my mind should be an obscure and dignified rustication in the wilderness of the Lone Star State, daily thanking God for a system of government that allows him that retirement, rather than turning him over to the World Court in flexicuffs and with a black bag over his head.

Make no mistake here: there has been a tremendous revolution in this country, two years in the making, which we seem to take for granted because the weight of our democratic traditions is so strong that it is hard to imagine it happening any other way. But from where I sit, the changes I see could not be more profound. It represents a complete transformation in the philosophy of governance, and a change-over in the control of the reins of power -- without violence or even the threat of violence, but rather via the ritualized recognition of the changed mandate of the people, and the voluntary surrender of power from those who once wielded it to those whom the people have chosen to replace them.

And already I can hear the Republican Noise Machine tuning up to talk about "the Obama Depression," blaming those who have held power for eight days for the mistakes and failed policies of those who misgoverned this country for the past eight years. But it's not going to work, because the people have seen the light and understand that it will be a long road back, even with all of us working and sacrificing together. The War on Terror, Global Warming, the Mortgage Crisis, Universal Health Care, rebuilding both the physical and the fiscal infrastructure of this country, and providing the next generation with the knowledge and skills they will need to compete in the global marketplace...not to mention the return of our civil and constitutional rights stripped away by the Patriot Act...it's a big agenda, but we can get it done. Embittered neofascist naysayers notwithstanding.

If the Matrix ran on Windows

2009-01-16T14:00:00.002-05:00

Thought I'd make this random post, since it's been a couple of weeks since I've written anything here, and that really is way too long. So far though 2009 has been pretty laid back: preached once, paid some bills, had good news from my most recent CT scan (which you can read about at One Day Isle), and have generally just been digging out from underneath the holidays. Days have been bright but cold, and with the exception of one tough weekend following my most recent chemotherapy, my energy has been pretty good as well, despite the fact that I'm only generally sleeping now for two to three hours at a time.

Anyway, here's a cute little something from the folks at college humor about what it would be like if the Matrix ran on Windows.

I'm so glad this wasn't MY wedding....

2009-01-01T09:03:00.003-05:00

And I suspect other clergy will immediately empathize. I've had some strange things happen at weddings where I've been the officiant, often around the rings. One of my best moments was when a ring flew loose from the pillow where it had been tied, and I reached out and snatched it in mid-air like it was something I did every day, and handed it to the bride to place upon the groom's finger. And I've also been the victim of a practical joke, where the best man pretended to have forgotten the ring, and all of the attendants pretended to check their pockets until it was finally "discovered" at the end of the line. A very funny moment (and fortunately, they were my friends), but a challenge then to pull the service back to the proper level of solemnity before I pronounced them husband and wife.

And perhaps my best wedding story ever (again, for friends) -- officiating at a wedding for two white water rafting guides on a rock in the middle of the Skykomish River above Goldbar in Washington State. The plan was to pronounce them husband and wife, and put them in a raft to float down to the reception a few miles away, while the rest of us drove ahead to meet them for their big entrance as a married couple. Unfortunately, in the middle of August the water in the river was very low; HOURS later they finally arrived to greet their now-well-lubricated guests with the story of their journey -- "float fifty yards, then pull it over the rocks; float another fifty yards...." Yep Steve, That's Marriage! -- for better, for worse; for richer, for poorer; in sickness and in health; in sorrow and in joy.... At least you guys were dressed for the occasion.

Here's the URL for the video, just in case the embed isn't working....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga-ULeG09QY

The Right to Bare Feet

2008-12-25T16:21:00.005-05:00

I still haven't gotten around to writing my annual Holiday Letter, which seems a little redundant given the amount of blogging I've done this year. Still, it is a tradition I would hate to interrupt, and perhaps just that small and gentle contact...an e-mail with a link to the text of the actual letter itself -- will be sufficient. I sure have enjoyed the cards, letters and e-mails I've received from so many of you. One of my favorites actually contained the suggestion that in light of the recent events of December 14th in Bagdad, we need a new Constitutional Amendment protecting the right to Bare Feet.

And I actually thought Bush showed pretty good composure about all this. He recognizes now that he is the lamest of Ducks, and that he needs to take all this shoe-throwing in stride. And in some ways it's reassuring that he can still be the butt of a joke, and NOT take it too personally...one more reason for me NOT to want to turn him over to the World Court following Obama's Inauguration. I don't feel nearly so charitable toward Dick Cheney, or Donald Rumsfeld, or Roberto Gonzales. And good luck to Condi in what I imagine will be a four-year cat-fight with Sarah Palin for the heart and soul of what is left of the Republican Party.

And while I'm thinking about it, now that the shoe is on the other foot, let's also hope that the Democrats can keep it together for a change, rather than tearing their party apart bickering over the best seats in the big tent. Already the kerfuffle over Rick Warren offering the Invocation seems silly and ridiculous. I know there's a lot of Gay and Lesbian supporters of Obama who are outraged that such an outspoken proponent of Proposition 8 should be given such a prominent place at the swearing in of the next President. What I don't think they really appreciate though is the very high likelihood that Warren will eventually come around on this issue, just as so many of the rest of us have, once we became more familiar with it ourselves.

Excellence in Ministry

2008-12-06T08:38:00.008-05:00

Former pulpit of the 2nd Church in Boston, once used by Henry Ware Jr. and Ralph Waldo Emerson. Now located at the First Parish in Billerica Massachusetts.

Over at iMinister and PeaceBang, my dear friends Christine and Vickie are hosting a conversation about Excellence in Ministry. It's a topic I have no little interest in myself, and so even though I can't really spare the time, I thought I'd toss in at least two cents worth now.

1. I'm one of those anachronisms who enrolled in seminary (Harvard Divinity) immediately after graduating from college, and who had completed my degree, seen the MFC and been ordained by the congregation where I did my field education (the 1st & 2nd Church in Boston) all before my 25th birthday. Of course, no one in their right mind was going to trust a newly-minted 24-year-old preacher with a pulpit of his own, so I ended up spending ANOTHER two years in graduate school studying creative writing and working as a Residence Hall Director, before being offered a year-long position as an intern assistant minister at my "home" church (University Unitarian Church in Seattle), and eventually receiving a call to a pulpit of my own (Midland, Texas) the week I turned 28.

2. Since that time, I have (for the most part) enjoyed a somewhat eclectic up-and-down career which has included work as an extension minister/new congregation organizer, half-a-dozen part-time consulting ministries, some time away from ministry managing a bookstore (while my now-ex-wife attended Law School), an earned PhD of my own (in American History) along with an interdisciplinary Masters Degree (my third, if you're counting) in American Studies, plus work as a graduate teaching fellow (and on occasion a visiting adjunct professor) in the fields of English/Creative Writing, Philosophy, Religious Studies (I was Marcus Borg's personal teaching assistant) and, of course, History. In addition I spent a semester abroad in Denmark as a visiting doctoral student at Aalborg University's "School for Postgraduate Interdisciplinary Research in Interculturality and Transnationalism" (SPIRIT), and since completing my dissertation in 2001 have served a two-year interim ministry on Nantucket Island, a four-year settled ministry in Carlisle Massachusetts, and am now in my second year of a settled ministry at the First Parish in Portland Maine. So I come to this topic with no shortage of either credentials or experience, as well as a perspective that is no doubt quite different from that of someone about my age (or even a decade or two younger) who is currently working in a secular vocation, but still dreaming about becoming a minister when they grow up.

3. So having said all that, let me enter the conversation. People seem to want to argue that there is more than one path into the ministry, and that these paths need to be honored and respected more than they are. With that I can agree. But then they also seem to want to assert that "all ministries are equal," and I'm not so sure that I can agree with that. All these credentials are not just about some additional letters behind my name; they represent real work, real learning, and real achievement which were specifically focused on improving my competence and qualifications for the ministry itself. It's not that I want to discount the achievements of those who are working in other fields, and in effect bringing their "transferable skills" with them. I would suggest, however, that sometimes these "imports" do more harm than good, in that they tend to displace a long and subtle history of ecclesiastical tradition with the "values of the marketplace" in ways that are often inappropriate and damaging to the health of the institution.

4. There also seems to be a lot of complaining about attitudes of ministerial "privilege," and the sense of entitlement that comes from having successfully leapt through all the "hoops." And with this I agree entirely - I think it is one of the most potentially damaging challenges our profession faces, and the sooner we can cure ourselves of it the better. Ministry is indeed a "privilege" -- it's an honor indivduals bestow upon us one at a time by trusting us enough to let us be "their minister;" it is a kind of authority which can take a lifetime to accumulate, and can be squandered in an instant. So notwithstanding all of the letters behind my own name, I am a profound believer in the principle that "All Ministry is Local," and that the credentials themselves are essentially meaningless, and valuable only to the extent that earning them has in some way helped me to become a better minister in the process.

5. Speaking of hoops (the burning, not the basketball kind) and the jumping through thereof, I certainly have a lot of empathy for those who still have that process in front of them, rather than well behind them (as I do). But let's face it, some sort of advance credentialling or process of "approbation" is essential to ANY profession, and perhaps especially essential to one like ours, which unlike either of the other two "learned" professions (law and medicine) typically brings the practitioner into their full responsibilities right on day one, in an environment where they typically work alone without much opportunity for supervision, external accountability, or daily mentoring by a more experienced, senior colleague. Even our internship process is awkward, since it tends to train ministers in large, multi-staff situations only to prepare them poorly for the kinds of expectations they will experience in the small "family" or "pastoral" sized churches where they are most likely to be called. A good portion of the second chapter of my doctoral dissertation is devoted to the history of the Approbation process in our movement, beginning in Puritan times and continuing into the 19th century. Interestingly enough, we still examine our candidates according to the same basic criteria as the Puritans: Competence, Character, and Commitment to the Faith. I don't think these are bad criteria at all. The big questions are how do we define "Competence" and what do we mean by "Commitment?" Character is always going to be a judgement call. Better the MFC though than leaving it up to self-selection, or even the judgement of local search committees (amateurs for whom it is literally a once-in-a-lifetime experience).

6. Another big complaint: the cost of seminary and the amount of debt it often places on newly-minted ministers entering a profession notorious for its low, flat and static levels of compensation. I was lucky, I guess -- between a combination of work, scholarships, and frugal living, I was able to graduate from Harvard (in 1981) with a debt of only $7000. Since I had no college debt at that point either (hurrah for in-state tuition at an excellent public university!), and was able to get through that second MA in Creative Writing with only another $2500 in additional borrowing, I finished my first incarnation as a student with a very reasonable debt load, despite a starting salary in my first settlement of only $30k (TCM. S/H was probably closer to $22k).

In my second incarnation it was a similar story - the teaching fellowships, a few grants (including one from the UU Scholars program), and my work as a part-time consulting minister essentially paid my tuition and kept me debt free, even though my spouse's income as a trial lawyer was perfectly sufficient to support our entire family. So while I feel I understand the concern that midlife career changers might feel about the cost of seminary (and it's corresponding debt load) in comparison to the level of earnings one can anticipate upon completion of the degree, I'm not especially sympathetic either. No one has a "right" to become a UU minister simply because they are "feeling the call," and likewise the decision to pursue a theological education does not necessarily entitle someone to have that education paid for by someone else. I think some combination of competitive, merit-based scholarships together with a systematic process to help ministers who agree to serve small, struggling congregations with denominational assistance in repaying their student loans is still the best strategy.

But this understanding also needs to be linked with a much more intentional method for ministerial development other than mere self-discernment, as well as the more fundamental understanding that NO ONE SHOULD UNDERTAKE ADVANCED THEOLOGICAL STUDY WITHOUT BEING WILLING TO DO SO FOR THE SAKE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SELF-IMPROVEMENT ALONE, AND WITH THE FULL UNDERSTANDING THAT IT MAY NEVER LEAD TO AN ACTUAL "PAYING" JOB IN THE MINISTRY! As for the question of whether or not a seminary education is really essential to being an effective Parish Minister, I would have to say both yes and no. On one hand, there is certainly plenty of "ministry" that can happen in a parish that anyone with a good heart, a sincere commitment, and a certain level of on-the-job training can do perfectly competently. But "doing" ministry and "being" a minister are two very different things. I'm happy to "share" the work of ministry as broadly as possible; in fact, it's an important part of what every minister should do to equip and prepare their people for wider service. But before I'm willing to let someone call themselves my "colleague," and to claim for themselves all of the so-called "rights and privileges" attendant to that status, I want to KNOW that they have gone through a thorough and rigorous program of advanced academic study, and are intellectually prepared to understand and represent the finer points of our theological and ecclesiastical traditions. Perhaps more to the point, I want to know that they were willing to make the same kinds of personal and financial sacrifices that I was willing to make, and that their commitment to the ministry is about something more profound than merely a title and a paycheck.

7. Finally (yes, finally...at least for now) there was an interesting point raised by someone about "suspicion" of Excellence in Ministry, and whether or not our congregations are really well prepared to cope with a truly excellent and (by association) ambitious minister. I have several thoughts about this. First, it does often seem to me that many of our congregations (especially small, "stuck" ones) are operating under the informal syllogism that "Knowledge is Power," and "Power Corrupts;" therefore We must Disempower the Knowledgeable in order to Prevent them from Corrupting our Democratic Process. Top-down leadership often doesn't fly in our movement; instead it results in a rapid nose-dive followed by a dramatic crash-and-burn. This is a VERY hard lesson to learn: that churches tend to move "at the speed of church," and that Patience, Persistence, Tenacity and Commitment to a Larger Vision are often far more important to success than mere brilliance and hard work alone. For clergy, the church is not only a livelihood, it is also a lifestyle; we are (or should be) committed to our vocation 24/7/365, and even when we are disciplined about taking a regular day off, we don't stop "being" a minister even for a moment. Yet for most lay people, a 3-5 hour/week commitment to their faith community is extraordinary, while 3-5 hours/month is probably far closer to the norm. Achieving excellence (and with it, "success") has somewhat different rules in this kind of work environment. The ability to work with people, to leverage their efforts rather than wasting their time, to organize the tasks into manageable "bites" and to battle frustration and discouragement with encouraging words and visible progress...in a word, to build and coach a team rather than trying to do it all by oneself.... this is the real key to Excellence in Ministry in the 21st century, so far as I can see it. How well does this match up with what other folks are seeing in their situations?

Is it a Phoenix or an "Obama?"

2008-12-04T08:58:00.007-05:00

I've never met Robin E*****, the so-called self-titled (not to mention self-appointed) "Emerson Avenger," and frankly I hope never to have the pleasure. I know him by reputation, of course, as I suspect so many other bloggers do here in the UU blogosphere, but since I generally find his posts kind of abrasive and unpleasant, mostly I just try to ignore him in the hope that our paths through cyberspace will cross as little as possible.

Yet lately for some reason he has chosen to take a shine to me again, this time even going so far as accusing me of plagiarism because he apparently ALSO saw the image of the Demographic Map of the United States of America plotting the outcome of the last election in shades of Blue and Red based on the percentage of the popular vote, and "normalized" geographically for population density I wrote about in a previous post, and it also reminded him of a Phoenix.

But before we go too far together down THAT road Brother E******, let me offer you a basic tutorial in communications law for working writers.

Plagiarism is essentially defined as "the purloining of literary work." [Gotta LOVE THAT definition! -- it pretty much just says it all...] Simply having a similar idea based on a similar response to a shared source of inspiration is in no way, shape or form ANYTHING resembling actual plagiarism; it is simply a demonstration that not only do great minds think alike, but sometimes even great minds and not-so-great minds can have similar thoughts...the difference being that a Truly Great Mind recognizes that there is simply "something in the air," while the not-so-great mind foolishly (and some might say narcissistically) mistakes the obvious for their own unique and original thought.

But to bring this back to the topic at hand, writers cannot copyright "ideas" -- they may only copyright a unique and original expression of an idea -- in other words, actual and specific language and phrasing which embody and express a unique perspective of a shared (or private) inspiration, which in turn could then be plagiarized by someone else who saw that unique expression, "purloined" (i.e. stole or copied) it, and then attempted to pass it off (obviously without attribution) as their own work. An even more basic point is that in almost ALL cases an actual plagiarist has to have actually SEEN the original work in order to "steal" it. You can't really copy something you've never even read.

As both an academic and a clergyman I tend to take allegations of plagiarism fairly seriously, since in many ways it strikes at the core of everything I believe about integrity and creativity and their importance to the human soul. On the other hand, I also tend to take a fairly broad and "liberal" view of "fair use;" we are, after all, called upon to Proclaim the Good News, not to copyright it. Yet to palm off someone's original work as your own, when tools like the internet make it so easy these days to find and attribute almost anything, is truly shameful. But if you look back at what I've actually written, you'll notice right away that I've done nothing of the sort.

Quickly now - if you look at MY original post, you'll notice that not only do I compare this image to a Phoenix, I also compare it to the Holy Spirit (in the form of a Dove, as in Luke's Gospel), and make several other references to other aspects of our shared cultural mythology, before finally getting around to making the one statement that might indeed be potentially copyrightable, and name this bird a "Barack." Again, not a particularly obscure idea; it could have occurred to anyone. But it just so happened to occur to me -- and it is unique, and it is original, and as far as I'm concerned, folks can copy it as much as they like (although a little honest attribution is always welcome....)

What Have You Done in your Life? a meme

2008-12-02T20:25:00.009-05:00

What have you done in your life? -- A meme I found on a couple other blogs. (What I've done is in bold, with comments in the parentheses) To play, copy the following list. Bold the things you've done. Post on your own blog...

Started my own blog
Slept under the stars
Played in a band
Visited Hawaii [but I hope to before I die]
Watched a meteor shower
Given more than I can afford to charity (except obviously, I COULD afford it)
Been to Disneyland/world
Climbed a mountain (but it wasn't really MUCH of a mountain - not like Hood or Rainier, for instance)
Held a praying mantis
Sung a solo (during a "cafe night" on Nantucket. "Hey there. You with the stars in your eyes....")
Bungee jumped
Visited Paris
Watched lightning at sea (although I was still on the land)
Taught myself an art from scratch (from SCRATCH?)
Adopted a child
Had food poisoning
Walked to the top of the Statue of Liberty
Grown my own vegetables (and hope to again, someday)
Seen the Mona Lisa in France
Slept on an overnight train
Had a pillow fight
Hitchhiked
Taken a sick day when not ill (unless we're counting mental health)
Built a snow fort
Held a lamb
Gone skinny dipping
Run a marathon
Ridden in a gondola in Venice (could have if I'd wanted to)
Seen a total eclipse
Watched a sunrise or sunset
Hit a home run
Been on a cruise (but I'm planning to soon. Possibly as soon as this summer)
Seen Niagara Falls in person (planning to do this soon too, and also visit the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown)
Visited the birthplace of my ancestors
Seen an Amish community (this may happen soon too)
Taught myself a new language (although not very well. I'm still learning though)
Had enough money to be truly satisfied (satisfaction is such a subjective thing)
Seen the Leaning Tower of Pisa in person
Gone rock climbing
Seen Michelangelo's David
Sung karaoke (and now, admitted it)
Seen Old Faithful geyser erupt
Bought a stranger a meal at a restaurant
Visited Africa (again, maybe as part of my cruise)
Walked on a beach by moonlight
Been transported in an ambulance
Had my portrait painted (now THERE'S a great idea. Does a caricature count?)
gone deep sea fishing
Seen the Sistine Chapel in person
Been to the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris (again, could have if I'd wanted to. I'd rather look AT it than down from it)
Gone scuba diving or snorkeling (my ex was the diver. I have used a snorkel though)
Kissed in the rain
Played in the mud
Gone to a drive-in theater
Been in a movie
Visited the Great Wall of China
Started a business (unless you think of a ministry as a "business")
Taken a martial arts class
Visited Russia
Served at a soup kitchen
Sold Girl Scout Cookies (But I've sure bought plenty in my day!)
Gone whale watching (I've seen some though)
Gotten flowers for no reason
Donated blood, platelets or plasma
Gone sky diving
Visited a Nazi concentration camp
Bounced a check (but it wasn't my fault - the check TO ME bounced first)
Flown in a helicopter
Saved a favorite childhood toy
Visited the Lincoln Memorial
Eaten caviar
Pieced a quilt (let's say, HELPED piece a quilt)
Stood in Times Square
Toured the Everglades
Been fired from a job
Seen the Changing of the Guard in London
Broken a bone (not even a finger. Can you believe it?)
Been on a speeding motorcycle (don't tell my mother
Seen the Grand Canyon in person
Published a book (this is actually in the process of happening now. A long, SLOW process....)
Visited the Vatican
Bought a brand new car (but now I can't drive it...)
Walked in Jerusalem
Had my picture in the newspaper
Read the entire Bible
Visited the White House (just the outside)
Killed and prepared an animal for eating (Hummmm... maybe after I've held the lamb, I can...)
Had chickenpox
Saved someone's life (they probably would have lived anyway)
Sat on a jury (no competent lawyer is ever going to let ME on a jury...)
Met someone famous
Joined a book club
Lost a loved one
Had a baby
Seen the Alamo in person
Swam in the Great Salt Lake
Been involved in a law suit
Owned a cell phone
Been stung by a bee
Ridden an elephant (but I'd like to before I die)

Chalice Chick's additions:

Read all three volumes of the Lord of the Rings
(multiple times)
Visited the Taj Mahal
Performed in a dance recital
Been on horseback while the horse jumped over something
Won an athletic competition
Gotten a straight-A report card
Prayed to Zeus
Watched news coverage, rapt, to see what was going to happen
Gotten lost in a building more than 500 years old
Kissed somebody milliseconds before bells started to ring. (well, maybe not "milliseconds")

Joel Monka’s additions:

Made love in a moving vehicle (again, if boats count)
Created something you know you'll never better (let's say, suspect I will never better)
Held a pet while they died (just this past October 4th)
Walked the Promenade Des Anglaises in Nice. (and it was...Nice)

Patrick Murfin's additions:

Graduated from college
Been in Prison (well, not as a prisoner)
Written the Great American Novel (it is neither great, nor technically a novel...but it is American. "My life's the poem I would have writ, but I could not both live and utter it.")
Ridden the rails (used to daydream about this quite a bit, but I'm way too old for it now. And times have changed....)
Seen that Alaska (despite having grown up in Seattle, the gateway to "the Last Frontier.")
Been booed and/or heckled (in church, no less)
Been elected to public office (unless Vice President of one's High School Student Government counts...)

Can You Name This Creature?

2008-11-27T13:04:00.013-05:00

It looks almost like a Phoenix, doesn't it? - rising from the ashes of something that has been burnt in its entirity (holocaust?), yet carrying with it both the vow of "never again," and the promise of a new and wiser beginning. Or perhaps it's a dove, or the spirit in the form of a dove, rising into heaven, where it might "stand again" (anastasis?) and inspire others to follow and embody it whever they are led.

[And my sincere apologies to those of you who object on theological grounds to my comparing these two terms (and these two birds); it's not intended as a profound theological statement or profession of doctrine - it is simply a random association of two etymologies with two familiar myths, or a familiar myth and a horrifying truth, or two "truths," or...]

But before we go much further, what it actually just so happens to be (and I think I have this right) is a Demographic Map of the United States of America plotting the outcome of the last election in shades of Blue and Red based on the percentage of the popular vote, and "normalized" geographically for population density.

This is the bird that bears on its back the burden of all of our dreams and hopes and expectations.

This is the Creature which we have created by Word Alone: by breathing OUR Spirit over the face of the Deep, and hoping it will be good.

It is a cultural Rorschach of the Spirit of the Age, a reflection of the Archetype of the Zeitgeist.

I dunno. Whaddya say we call it a "Barack?"

From "An Essay on Man" by Alexander Pope

2008-11-24T06:14:00.005-05:00

Know then thyself, presume not God to scan,
The proper study of mankind is Man.
Placed on this isthmus of a middle state,
A being darkly wise and rudely great:
With too much knowledge for the Sceptic side,
With too much weakness for the Stoic's pride,
He hangs between, in doubt to act or rest;
In doubt to deem himself a God or Beast;
In doubt his mind or body to prefer;
Born but to die, and reas'ning but to err;
Alike in ignorance, his reason such,
Whether he thinks too little or too much;
Chaos of thought and passion, all confused;
Still by himself abused or disabused;
Created half to rise, and half to fall:
Great lord of all things, yet a prey to all;
Sole judge of truth, in endless error hurl'd;
The glory, jest, and riddle of the world!

Why Do You Ewes Use "UUs?"

2008-11-18T09:44:00.002-05:00

I have to admit, as ackward and tongue-twisting as "Unitarian Universalsm" may be, it is infinitely preferable to the acronym "UU." And I don't even want to think about the connotations of "UUism," much less "Unitarian Universalist TM." This whole on-going discussion about whether or not UUism is a form a liberal Christianity, a post-Christian Protestant heresy (open, of course, to inspiration from ALL the world's great religious traditions), or actually an entirely New Religion altogether seems as pointless to me as the seemingly interminable debates about whether or not certain semi-obscure celebrities from a century or two ago ever actually "signed the book." But here's my larger point....

So many of these discussions seem to boil down to anxiety about identity, legitimacy, and a desire for better "branding." And with that anxiety and that desire comes a whole history of baggage around issues of anti-creedalism and freedom of conscience, together with both a perceived need and a profound reluctance to articulate "Things Most Commonly Believed Among Us To-Day." And this reflects yet another tension at the center of our movement: our understanding that "all ministry is local," and that the proper location of the authentic religious/spiritual life is within a covenanted local congregation and community, and the ambition to develop a higher public profile, grow in numbers and influence, and become a more powerful presence on the religious landscape.

So with all that water now under the bridge (at least until the tide turns again), here's something that I've often wondered about, and in particular have been wondering about again lately. Despite the great pride we take in being "a church without a creed," we are the ONLY denomination I can think of off the top of my head that takes its name from two explicitly theological doctrines: Unitarianism = a belief that God is One (i.e. radical monotheism, and more explicitly the rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity) and Universalism = a belief that All Souls shall ultimately be reconciled to their Creator (i.e. Universal Salvation: the "no Hell" church). So here's my Question: can one be a good "UU" and still find meaning in the doctrine of the Trinity (never mind Pantheism, or its opposite Atheism), or believe that SOME souls, at least, are going to Hell, and deservedly so?

Just a few random thoughts, after having just finished teaching for the God Only Knows just how many times the "UU Identity" portion of our "New UU Explorers Class."

Yes We Can

2008-11-11T15:48:00.003-05:00

Yes We Can

...and the home of the brave....

2008-11-07T12:18:00.003-05:00

Yes. "Free at last, free at last, Great God Almighty, we are free at last." And I'm not really certain whether we should Praise God, that Supreme, Divine Being Who gives us life and gives life meaning...or simply thank our lucky stars...but this has sure been a very special week all over the world. And despite the incredible amount of chaos that still seems to reign over much of reality, I feel as if we all at last have at least turned a corner.

Now comes the TRULY hard work -- the challenge of coming together, agreeing on our priorities, defining our objectives, goals and desired outcomes, allocating our resources to match those priorities, and doing the work that needs to be done. Just doing the work. Believe me, there is plenty of work to go around for everyone. I hardly know where to begin.

Too Scary for Words

2008-10-16T11:51:00.003-04:00

Yes, this is an actual, legitimate, unphotoshopped photograph from last night's debate, showing EXACTLY what it appears to show: the decrepit old (white) Man Who Would Be President sticking his tongue out and (pretending to be?) grabbing at the ass of the handsome and articulate young (black) Man Who SHOULD Be President. And I hope this image surges through the media the same way that the Dukakis tank commander photo or Howard Dean's "Scream" did...but I doubt it will. It's the sort of photo that is easily ignored: no sound, no movement -- just a moment of still photography easily explained away as "a misdirected old man who got confused and was heading off stage in the wrong direction." Which sort of fits the overall theme of the McCain Campaign these days anyway.

I actually thought McCain did pretty well last night: didn't foam at the mouth, kept his temper, put Obama on the defensive with his carefully-crafted (and unrebuttable) innuendo, and basically seized control of both the tempo and the direction of the debate by ignoring the moderator and butting in whenever he felt like it. Played the race/age/experience card for all it was worth: a seasoned, well-tested (white) "Maverick" vs. the "eloquent," smooth-talking and good-looking but relatively unknown (and unfamiliar BLACK) "tax and spend" liberal. But at the end of the day, it was still the same old tired words out of the mouth of a washed-up, over-the-hill politician desperate for his crack at four years of unprecedented executive power.

I was, although, particularly entertained when McCain used a variation of the same line I suggested Al Gore should have used when Bush attempted to link him to the various Clinton scandals back in 2000: "that was the fella who beat your daddy; you have to run against ME." God how I wish Gore had won that election -- or should I say, fought harder to prevent the Bushies from STEALING that election. What a different world we would be living in now....

And it is still my fantasy that as George W. Bush exits the Inaugural Platform next January, it will be into the waiting arms of representatives of the World Court, who will then escort him to his holding cell in the Hague. And of course my great fear is that there will be no Inauguration -- that after the fiasco of THIS election (and God only knows what may happen next) the Bushies will fabricate some desperate excuse for holding on to power, and enforce it by military means.

Do we really want to see tanks in the streets of Washington DC? They say it could never happen here. But you know, recently I've seen a LOT of things folks said could never happen here. And while some have been good, some others have been not so good as well.

I guess a couple of other quick thoughts before I sign off, since I post here so infrequently as it is. I'm really concerned that we need not just an Obama victory, but an Obama landslide for this election to really create the mandate that Obama needs to effect meaningful change: a huge margin in both the electoral and the popular vote, plus solid majorities in both Houses, and strong showings in local elections as well. We need to sweep aside every last remnant of Karl Rove's vision of a "permanent Republican majority," and reinstate the more tolerant and diverse "liberal" family values based on civility, mutual concern, and the larger public good.

But beyond that, we will be laying a tremendous burden of expectation upon the shoulders of a single individual -- more than any one individual can possibly bear, I think. And so we all need to be willing to step up and to sacrifice in order to create the change we need. Sacrifice = to make sacred. It's OK if we all share it. But the plutocratic "croney capitalism" of the past eight years has GOT to end. And steps need to be taken to return that unprecedented concentration of wealth back to ALL the American people, so that it might be used for the common good.

And at the same time, given the Bush administration's unapologetic attempts to concentrate power in the hands of the Executive Branch, and the apparent NEED for that kind of power the next administration will claim it needs in order to undo the mess the Bushies have created, is there ANY politician on the Planet who could possibly be convinced to LET GO of that power once the essential tasks have been accomplished. We need a Cincinnatus, and not a Caesar. George Washington understood that. I think even Michael Dukakis did. But do you really think that Sarah Palin has even a CLUE to what I'm talking about?

The Politics of Spectacle and Distraction

2008-09-27T09:22:00.005-04:00

Last month I blogged on this site comparing Sarah Paliln's selection as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate to the Harriet Meiers nomination to the Supreme Court, and suggested that within the week the Alaskan Hockey Mom would gracefully withdraw from the ticket, having done her job of confusing an ever-more fickle electorate and distracting attention from the real issues in these critical last few weeks before voters finally go to the polls. LINK to Original Post here (be sure to scroll down through the comments).

Now here comes the Other Shoe. Palin is clearly failin' Big Time -- she's not only out of her league, she's WAY out of her league -- even her own party can see it, it makes me a little sad even to have to witness it; and IF she remains on the ticket, and IF the Republicans should somehow manage to win in November, it is almost a CERTAINTY that Sarah Palin will at some point become the POTUS -- which would make our country more FUBAR than I even dare to imagine.

So maybe it's my turn now to do a little praying. God help us. God help us. God help us. God help us....

How Racism Works.

2008-09-17T15:47:00.004-04:00

A former parishioner of mine just e-mailed these to me, and I found them so telling I've decided to spread them around as much as I can. Hope all y'all will do the same!

How racism works:

1. What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
2. What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
3. What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said "I do" to?
4. What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?

1. What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
2. What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
3. What if Obama were a member of the "Keating 5"?
4. What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are? This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.

Mary M. Gaylord
Sosland Family Professor of Romance Languages and
Literatures
Director of Undergraduate Studies
Undergraduate Adviser for Romance Studies
424 Boylston Hall, Harvard Yard
Cambridge MA 02138
Ph: 617-496-6027; Fax: 617-496-4682
--
Jane R. Dickie
Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies.
Hope College.
Holland, MI 49423

Onward and Upward Forever

2008-09-12T17:47:00.007-04:00

There's been quite a lively discussion lately both here in the blogosphere and also on the various UUA CHAT-lists to which I subscribe about the new Commission on Appraisal's proposed revisions to our current statement of Principles, Purposes and Sources. I don't have much to add (or at least not much that I CARE to add) to the discussion there, but I do think it might be fun to glance back at the "original source material" for what, historically at least, has been both our most popular and most parodied statement of "Things Most Commonly Believed Among Us To-Day."

[For those of you unfamiliar with Five Point Calvinism, it might help to remember the acronym TULIP: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable Grace, and Predestination. In other words, there is not a healthy bone in our bodies, but God for reasons known only to Himself has chosen to redeem a few of us from eternal damnation. But it is ONLY a few, and even if we would rather NOT be saved we're going to heaven anyway. Furthermore, it was all decided for us since before the beginning of time, so stop fretting so much about Faith and Works and the moral consequences of your actions, or whether or not you have Free Will, and get out there and earn a little more money for the greater glory of God, fer crissakes!...]

***
"The Five Points of Calvinism and the Five Points of the New Theology" from Vexed Questions in Theology by James Freeman Clarke (Boston: 1886)

“And thou shalt make . . . five pillars, and overlay them with gold, . . . and shalt cast five sockets of brass for them." — Exodus xxiv., 37.

THE number five has acquired as great significance in theology as it has in nature. The largest family of plants is that of which the flowers have five petals; and the most popular theology of modern times is that of Calvin with its five points of doctrine, which relate to Absolute Decrees, Atonement by Christ for the Elect only, Original Sin, Effectual Calling, and the Perseverance of Saints.

Such have been the main and essential doctrines of Orthodoxy in the past. These doctrines have revolved around the ideas of sin and salvation. The creeds are as remarkable for what they omit as for what they assert. They scarcely allude to those truths which Jesus makes the chief burden of his teaching, — love to God, love to man, forgiveness of enemies, purity of heart and life, faith, hope, peace, resignation, temperance, and goodness. It is certain that the theology of the future will dwell on something else than the five points of Calvinism, and I have thought it well to consider the counterparts of this ancient system in five points of the coming theology. Let us endeavor to see what they will be.

I. I believe the first point of doctrine in the theology of the future will be the Fatherhood of God.

The essence of this is the love of the father for his children. Fatherly love is a wise love, a firm love, and a pure love, which seeks the best good of the child. Thus this idea of fatherhood includes that of the holiness, the truthfulness, and the justice of God, — in a word, all the divine attributes. The justice of God as a father is not, as in the old theology, an abstract justice, which has no regard to consequences. God's justice is only another form of mercy. It is the wise law which brings good to the universe, and is a blessing to every creature.

Jesus has everywhere emphasized this truth, that God is a father. We find it pervading the Gospels and coloring all his teaching. We find it already in the Sermon on the Mount, which tells us that we are to let our light shine, not to glorify ourselves, but to glorify our Father in heaven; that we are to love our enemies, that we may be like our heavenly Father, who loves his enemies, and makes his sun rise on the evil and the good. Jesus tells us that, when we pray, we are to pray to our Father, not to infinite power or abstract justice or far-off sovereignty. We are to forgive others, because our Father in heaven forgives us. We are not to be anxious, remembering that our heavenly Father feeds the little birds of the air. We are to pray, confident that our heavenly Father will give good things to those who ask him. Thus, this idea of God pervades the earliest as it filled the latest teachings of Jesus.

This idea of the divine fatherhood goes down so deep into the human heart that it becomes the source of a childlike obedience, trust, submission, patience, hope, and love. It brings consolation to us in our trials, gives us earnestness in prayer, makes it less difficult to repent when we have done wrong. We look up out of our sin and weakness and sorrow, not to an implacable law, not to an abstract king, but to an infinite and inexhaustible tenderness. Thus, this doctrine is the source of the purest piety.

2. The second point of doctrine in the new theology will be, I think, the Brotherhood of Man.

If men are children of the same father, then they are all brethren. If God loves them all, they must all have in them something lovable. If he has brought them here by his providence, they are here for some important end. Therefore, we must call no man common or unclean, look down upon none, despise none, but respect in all that essential goodness which God has put into the soul, and which he means to be at last unfolded into perfection.

As from the idea of the fatherhood of God will come all the pieties, so from that of the brotherhood of man will proceed all the charities. This doctrine is already the source of missions, philanthropies, reforms, and all efforts to seek and save those who are surrounded by evil. It leads men to feed the hungry and clothe the naked, to teach the blind, to soothe the madness of delirium, to diffuse knowledge, and carry glad tidings to the poor. And this doctrine, when fully believed, will be the source of purer moralities and nobler charities.

This truth, also, Jesus has taught by his words and his life. He went about doing good, feeding the hungry, making the blind to see, the deaf to hear, the lame to walk, cleansing the leper, preaching the gospel to the poor. He was the friend of publicans and sinners, of the Roman centurion, the woman of Phoenicia, the woman of Samaria. He was the friend and helper of all who needed him. In the story of the Good Samaritan, he taught that all men are brethren. And his last recorded words were the command to preach the gospel to every creature.

3. The third point of doctrine in the new theology will be, as I think, the Leadership of Jesus.

The simplest definition of a Christian is one who follows Christ. This was his own definition: "My sheep hear my voice, and follow me." "I am the way and the truth and the life." "Come to me, all ye who labor and are heavy laden." When Mary sat at the feet of Jesus, and heard his words, he said that she had chosen the good part, and had done the one thing needful.

A Platonist is one who studies the teachings of Plato, and takes him for his teacher and guide in philosophy. A Swedenborgian is one who studies the teachings of Swedenborg, and takes him for his guide in theology. A Christian is one who takes Jesus as his guide in religion, and who goes directly to his teachings for religious truth.

But hitherto, instead of considering those as Christians who have studied the words of Jesus, and sought to know the truth, the name has usually been given to those who accepted some opinion about him. Not what he himself teaches, but what the Church says he teaches, has been made the test of Christian fellowship. Men have been told to go to Jesus, but on the understanding that they shall learn from him only the same thing which the Church has already learned. Instead of sending us to the teacher himself, we are sent to our fellow-students. We, therefore, in reality take them, and not Jesus, for our leader.

The Athanasian Creed asserts as unquestioned verities certain metaphysical statements in regard to the nature of the Deity and the relations which existed between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before the creation. These speculations are read four times a year in the Church of England, and the people are told that those who do not believe these superhuman mysteries shall without doubt perish everlastingly. Is it not evident that the Church, in doing this, takes the unknown author of the creed as its leader and teacher instead of taking Christ himself? All human creeds which are made the tests of what Christ taught are in reality put in his place. Compared with his teaching, they are all narrow and unspiritual. They emphasize some purely intellectual statements which chanced to be popular when they were written. The makers of these creeds tell us to call Jesus teacher, but to learn from themselves what he teaches. They show thus that they dare not trust us to go to him; and they show that they have no real faith in him as the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Of course there is no harm in a creed, when it merely states what a man believes at the present time or what any number of men believe at any particular period. The harm comes from making the creed a perpetual standard of belief, a test of Christian character, and a condition of Christian fellowship. Such creeds, instead of uniting the Church, have divided it into endless sects and parties. Let men take Jesus himself as their leader and teacher, and the Church will be again one. Then Christians will come into communion not only with the mind, but also with the heart of the Master. When the whole Church is like Mary sitting at the foot of Jesus and hearing his words, it will be more full of his spirit. Bigotry and sectarianism, which have cursed Christianity, will disappear, and be replaced by the large generosity and ample charity of Jesus himself. We shall then, according to his striking Oriental image, eat his flesh and drink his blood. Instead of merely accepting propositions about him, we shall assimilate his character and feed on it in the depths of our heart. Then will lie fulfilled his saying: "My sheep hear my voice, and follow me. I know my sheep, and am known of mine."

4. The fourth point of the new theology will be Salvation by Character.

Salvation means the highest peace and joy of which the soul is capable. It means heaven here and heaven hereafter. This salvation has been explained as something outside of us, — some outward gift, some outward condition, place, or circumstance. We speak of going to heaven, as if we could be made happy solely by being put in a happy place. But the true heaven, the only heaven which Jesus knew, is a state of the soul. It is inward goodness. It is Christ found within. It is the love of God in the heart, going out into the life and character. The first words which Jesus spoke indicated this belief. The poor in spirit already possess the kingdom of heaven. The pure in heart already see God. "This is life eternal, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." He who has the faith which Jesus possessed has eternal life abiding in him. The water that Jesus gives becomes a spring of water within the soul, "springing up into everlasting life." Do not look for a distant heaven, saying, " Lo! here," or " Lo! there;" " for the kingdom of heaven is now with you." When we come to study the words of Jesus as we study human theologies, we shall find that he identifies goodness with heaven, and makes character the essence of salvation. As long as men believe that heaven is something outward, to be attained by an act of profession or belief, they, will be apt to postpone such preparation as long as possible. But when we apprehend the inflexible law of consequences, and know that as a man soweth so shall he reap; when we see that spiritual tastes and habits are not to be formed in an hour; and that all formal professions, prayers, and sacraments avail nothing, unless the heart is pure, the soul upright, and the life one of integrity, — then a new motive will be added to increase the goodness of the world. Then the formation of character will be the fruit of Christian faith to an extent never before realized.

5. The fifth point of doctrine in the new theology will, as I believe, be the Continuity of Human Development in all worlds, or the Progress of Mankind onward and upward forever.

Progress is the outward heaven, corresponding to the inward heaven of character. The hope of progress is one of the chief motives to action. Men are contented, no matter how poor their lot, so long as they can hope for something better. And men are discontented, no matter how fortunate their condition, when they have nothing more to look forward to. The greatest sufferer who hopes may have nothing, but he possesses all things: the most prosperous man who is deprived of hope may have all things, but he possesses nothing.

The old theology laid no stress on progress here or progress hereafter. The essential thing was conversion: that moment passed, the object of life was attained. A man converted on his death-bed, after a life of sin, was as well prepared for heaven as he who had led a Christian life during long years. And there was no hint given of farther progress after heaven should be reached. Eternity was to be passed in perpetual thanksgiving or in perpetual enjoyment of the joys of paradise. Such, however, was not the teaching of Jesus. The servant, in the parable, who earned two pounds, was made ruler over two cities : he who earned five pounds had the care of five cities. And the Apostle Paul tells us that one of the things which abide is hope. If hope abides, there is always something to look forward to, — some higher attainment, some larger usefulness, some nearer communion with God. And this accords with all we see and know: with the long processes of geologic development by which the earth became fitted to be the home of man ; with the slow ascent of organized beings from humbler to fuller life; with the progress of society from age to age; with the gradual diffusion of knowledge, advancement of civilization, growth of free institutions, and ever higher conceptions of God and of religious truth. The one fact which is written on nature and human life is the fact of progress, and this must be accepted as the purpose of the Creator.

Some such views as these may constitute the theology of the future. This, at least, we see, — that many of the most important elements in the teaching of Jesus have had no place, or a very inferior place, in the teachings of the Church in past times. As the good Robinson foretold, "more light is to break out from the Word of God." The divine word, revealed in creation, embodied in Christ, immanent in the human soul, is a fuller fountain than has been believed. No creed can exhaust its meaning, no metaphysics can measure its possibility. The teaching of Jesus is not something to be outgrown; for it is not a definite system, but an ever unfolding principle. It is a germ of growth, and therefore has no finality in any of its past forms. "Of its fulness," says John, "we have all received, and grace added to grace." The Apostle Paul regarded his own knowledge of Christianity as imperfect and partial. "We know in part," said he, "and we teach in part." Christianity in the past has always had a childlike faith, which was beautiful and true. But its knowledge has also been that of a child. It has spoken as a child, it has understood as a child, it has thought as a child. This was all well while it was a child. The prattle of an infant is sweet, but in a youth or man it is an anachronism. Let us have a childlike faith, but a manly intelligence. "In malice be children, but in understanding be men." Let us endeavor to see God and nature face to face, confident that whoever is honestly seeking the truth, though he may err for a time, can never go wholly wrong.

9/11 +7

2008-09-11T09:28:00.004-04:00

Lest We Forget....

"A Mind-Numbing Act of Senseless Violence"

a sermon preached by the Rev. Dr. Tim W. Jensen
at the Second Congregational Meeting House
on Nantucket Island, Sunday September 16, 2001

If you found this engaging, I continued in this same theme for the remainder of the month of September.

September 23, 2001
September 30, 2001

"An alert and knowledgeable citizenry..."

2008-09-10T19:56:00.008-04:00

This was Ike's (the President, not the hurricane) prescription against the triumph of the Military Industrial Complex, and the domination of our cherished free and democratic institutions by the forces of corporate greed, fear-mongering, and unregulated triumphalist capitalism. And I just wish I'd had the good sense to save the clip of his farewell address from YouTube (where I saw it), so that I could embed it here. Because it was amazing to me: both just how prescient and prophetic Eisenhower's observations have turned out to be, and also how different our society is today from what it was half a century ago.

The Civil Rights Movement. The "Summer of Love." Vietnam/Watergate. Feminism. Stonewall. Earth Day. Pat Robertson, the Moral Majority, and the Rise of the Religious Right. "Voodoo Economics" and the Reagan Revolution. AIDS. The Fall of the Berlin Wall and the End of the Cold War. The End of History and the Clash of Civilizations. Global Climate Change. Oh, and lets not forget about the information technology that has driven so much of the acceleration of our culture: computers, cell phones, the Internet. Or our global addiction to fossil fuels, and the politics of oil which have replaced Communism as the number one perceived threat to our national security.

And yet, rather than an alert and knowledgeable citizenry, we seem to have opted for bread and circuses...or at least cheap fast food and "reality" TV. We complain about the price of gasoline (when it's probably HALF of what it ought to be...), and watch with fascinated horror as the longest and most expensive Presidential Election in history enters its last 60 days, and suddenly becomes Reality TV writ large. Where's Jerry Springer when you need him? As the former Democratic mayor of Cincinati, he certainly should understand what's high in the middle and round on both ends. An election that seemed impossible for the Democrats to lose now looks more and more like a Republican shell game, all coming down to a final roll of the dice in the too-close-to-call crap shoot at the end. It's no longer about issues or policy. It's all just about holding on to power for another four years. If you can only confuse the electorate for another eight weeks.

At least Camille Paglia claims to have a handle on it all...

But what of Palin's pro-life stand? Creationism taught in schools? Book banning? Gay conversions? The Iraq war as God's plan? Zionism as a prelude to the apocalypse? We'll see how these big issues shake out. Right now, I don't believe much of what I read or hear about Palin in the media. To automatically assume that she is a religious fanatic who has embraced the most extreme ideas of her local church is exactly the kind of careless reasoning that has been unjustly applied to Barack Obama, whom the right wing is still trying to tar with the fulminating anti-American sermons of his longtime preacher, Jeremiah Wright.

The witch-trial hysteria of the past two incendiary weeks unfortunately reveals a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party, which has worsened over the past decade. Democrats are quick to attack the religiosity of Republicans, but Democratic ideology itself seems to have become a secular substitute religion. Since when did Democrats become so judgmental and intolerant? Conservatives are demonized, with the universe polarized into a Manichaean battle of us versus them, good versus evil. Democrats are clinging to pat group opinions as if they were inflexible moral absolutes. The party is in peril if it cannot observe and listen and adapt to changing social circumstances. [salon.com 9/10/2008]

Meanwhile, on an almost completely unrelated note, this is what I looked like back in 1976, just before I took advantage of my opportunity to "exercise the franchise" and vote for Jimmy Carter my first-ever Presidential election. I appear exceptionally alert and knowledgeable in this photography, don't you think? The strong, square chin. The long, curly flowing hair. The six-pack abs. Talk about changing times!

Lipstick

2008-09-05T11:00:00.006-04:00

I've never really found myself in the position of trying to apply lipstick to a pit bull. A pig, maybe. Or roadkill. But never a pit bull.

We're asking all the wrong questions about Sarah Barracuda. To repeat an insight I quoted from another blogger in an earlier post to this thread, "I'll be honest: if Sarah Palin was a fiercely pro-choice progressive, mother of five kids, who'd risen from mayor of a small town to democratic governor of her sparsely populated state, I'd be kind of in love with her. Wouldn't you? And wouldn't you, although a little hesitant, be excited about her having been selected as Obama's vice-president?"

The question isn't really whether she will be ready on Day One to take over as President. Few people are; in fact, I question whether ANYONE really is. The real question is whether or not she is ready now to be a candidate for the vice-presidency, whatever THAT means. And that really is something for the voters to decide for themselves.

Personally, I find myself somewhat fascinated by the folksy, small town Alaskan frontier provincialism in which being a commercial fisherman and a snow machine champion somehow count for as much as an Ivy League education...and maybe matter more. I love the schtick about being able to field dress a moose, and selling the gubernatorial jet on e-Bay. And she certainly does a credible job of reading someone else's words off a teleprompter; you can see how she earned her Barracuda nickname.

What I DON'T like are all the things that make her so popular with the other side to begin with: the pro-life, abstinence-only views regarding sex education; the attempted library book-banning; her attitude about the environment and global warming; and all the rest. I wouldn't vote for a candidate who held those positions under ordinary circumstances. Why should a little lipstick make any difference now?

And then there's this. I think little Trig will someday forgive his mom her 60-some day absence in his infancy to run for vice-president. And if she actually wins... what a way to grow up!

But how much lipstick will it take to make THIS look good?

Cussometer Rating

2008-09-02T18:33:00.002-04:00

Created by OnePlusYou - Free Dating Site

Thanks James for pointing us all to this. Reminds me of the old joke about how the only time the Lord's name was heard in the Unitarian church was when the sexton hit his thumb with a hammer....

Yet Another Thought about Sarah Palin

2008-09-02T09:01:00.003-04:00

***
M LeBlanc raises some interesting points about Sarah Palin over at her blog, Bitch PhD.

I'll be honest: if Sarah Palin was a fiercely pro-choice progressive, mother of five kids, who'd risen from mayor of a small town to democratic governor of her sparsely populated state, I'd be kind of in love with her. Wouldn't you? And wouldn't you, although a little hesitant, be excited about her having been selected as Obama's vice-president?

Yeah. OK. Maybe... I think THIS goes a little over the top though...

Race, Gender, and Social Location

2008-08-30T19:09:00.004-04:00

And as I sit here slack-jawed over McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his Vice-Presidential Running Mate, it occurs to me just how successfully he has distracted MY attention from the Democratic National Convention, and its message of "John McCain: More of the Same." Can't help but wonder whether this is just a tactic to take the spring out of the Democratic bounce, and that sometime next week there will be a graceful, Harriet Miers style withdrawal and Mitt will be back on the ticket after all.

Of course the Democrats are "on the right side of history." But if all we can talk about is the beauty-queen's hairstyle, how does that really help us now that "we are facing a planetary emergency which, if not solved, would exceed anything we've experienced in the history of humankind." [Al Gore]

Sure, "people the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." [Bill Clinton] But what kind of example of democracy do we set when issues and ideas are inevitably crowded out of the headlines by gossip, public spectacle, and personal attack?

And Joe Biden's grandmother may well have taught him that "No one is better than you; everyone is your equal, and everyone is equal to you." The problem is, a lot of people in this country -- powerful and important people -- don't really believe in all that "equality" crap.

And it's not just about race or gender either.

It's about the difference between someone who is about to lose their home to foreclosure on a sub-prime mortgage, and someone who can't even remember how many houses they own.

Or who has never had to worry about the affordability of their health insurance, because they have ALWAYS been able to afford to see any doctor that they wanted any time that they wanted, and to pay the bill in cash.

Or who doesn't really care about the rising cost of attending college, because their family has gone to the same private college in Connecticut for generations, and will no doubt continue to do so regardless of cost, or grades, or their SAT scores....

Sigh. How did the senior Senator from Massachusetts put it?

"The Work Begins Anew.
The Hope Rises Again.
And the Dream Lives On"

A loose canon?

2008-08-27T19:16:00.006-04:00

Over at his blog "The Latest Form of Infidelity," the Reverend Colin Bossen poses the question of whether or not there are certain Unitarian and Universalist "sacred texts" that rise to the level of Scripture, or at least "simply the special status of being important texts."

When I was still in seminary, and even early on into my ministry, this question of whether or not there was (or should be) a UU "canon," and which texts (or by what criteria texts) should be included in it was fairly important to me. But I later came to feel and understand that in many ways the whole issue of canonicity is misdirected -- it's a backhanded attempt to define an orthodoxy by defining a center so explicitly that the boundaries are no longer elastic or permeable.

Rather than canonizing our own, new "Scripture," what we are really looking for is a UU "Talmud" -- a body of texts that we can engage in on-going study and dialog with in ways that also engenders dialog with one another. So to the modest list of texts and authors you have mentioned, I would also want to add Henry Ware Jr's Formation of the Christian Character, as well as his introductory discourse following his own faculty appointment at Harvard on the relationship between Pulpit Eloquence and the Pastoral Care. His sermon on "The Personality of the Deity" (delivered in response to Emerson's Divinity School address) would also be on my short to medium list.

His father Henry Ware Sr's 1774 Compendious and Plain Catechism... written in collaboration with Ware's neighbor and colleague in Hingham, Daniel Shute (who thanks to where his name falls in the alphabet gets top billing, although we all have a pretty good idea of who really did most of the hard work) is also a document well-worthy of our attention...since it is doubtlessly one of the principal reasons Ware was nominated and selected for the Hollis Chair to begin with.

The "Wood 'n Ware" texts, on the other hand, are probably way too involved for general inclusion, but they might well be "mined" and anthologized for appropriate content, especially since they are considered by many scholars to be the best discussion of the issues of predestination and free will since Luther and Erasmus debated the question back in the 16th century.

[if it seems as though I am paying a lot of attention to the Wares, it is NOT simply because I wrote my own doctoral dissertation about them. Rather, it has to do with the historical observation that as key members of the Harvard Divinity School faculty, between the two of them they essentially educated an entire generation of Unitarian clergy in what is often referred to as the "Golden Age of American Unitarianism" -- a cohort which included both Emerson and Parker, as well as James Freeman Clarke, William Henry Channing, Joseph Henry Allen, and scores of others who continued to serve "Our Liberal Movement in Theology" well into the remainder of the century.]

Conrad Wright used to place great stock in Henry Whitney Bellows' "The Suspense of Faith;" if memory serves, I even recall hearing him say that if he had it to do over again, he would have included Bellows as the "Fourth Prophet" in the now-nearly canonical anthology that enshrined Channing, Emerson and Parker as the Holy Trinity of the 19th century Unitarian tradition in the first place.

One of the original criteria for New Testament canonicity was the suitability of the text for reading at public worship. Based on that source of authority, I've been struck by how often the words of Mary Oliver, Annie Dillard, and T.S. Eliot (or at least that bit on "the end of all our exploring") are proclaimed from our pulpits and lecterns on Sunday mornings. Forrest Church's passages on "The Cathedral of the World" and "the dual reality of being alive and having to die" both make my short list as well. Inclusion in the Hymnal is a clear and obvious marker of some form of semi-scriptural canonicity, so I suppose that Barbara Pescan and Mark Belletini (along with many of our other colleagues, both living and dead) would qualify on those grounds alone.

Here's another question: when we designate a text as "Scripture," what kind of authority does that give it? I often raise this point when talking about inerrancy and the authority of the Bible. Is something "true" simply because it has been included in the Bible? Or are things included in the Bible because somebody, somewhere thought that they were True? Profound Truth is in some ways the ultimate test of Scriptural Authority...and if it IS True, it's going to still be true (and thus authoritative) regardless of the kind of authority we assign it by designating it as "scriptural." So in that sense, anything we designate as scriptural is really just a tool to help us better discover and understand the scripture "written upon the heart." And that list could grow to be very long indeed.

From Pig-Headed to Bull-Headed to Mule-Headed...

2008-05-21T06:05:00.002-04:00

Today's lead was a simple one: "Despite being trounced in the Oregon primary, Hillary Clinton won't throw in the towel yet." Why? Who cares? It's embarrassing. For EVERYONE. And it really misses the point. This election isn't about who can win, or even who deserves to to be the nominee. It's about turning around eight years of disastrous policy fiascos that have even die-hard, died-in-the-wool multi-generation Republicans shaking their heads in shame and wondering what has become of the Grand Old Party they once new and loved. It's going to take leadership, but it's also going to take teamwork, and the best efforts and contributions of everyone who loves this country and what it stands for to put it right again.

Which is why I'm so mystified by Mrs. Clinton. Does she honestly believe that the ONLY position she is qualified to play in this next administration is QB 1? I've got news you Ma'am, and I"m sorry to have to be the one to share it. But most coaches I know only have one position on their team for a "team player" with THAT kind of attitude. It's warming the splinters at the far end of the bench....

A Perpetual Distraction

2008-05-02T15:45:00.000-04:00

I suppose one of the great advantages of being hospitalized for over a month is that it creates the perfect excuse for disengaging from the 24/7 news cycle. I decided a long time ago that I wasn't going to get too excited about the primary season, but would simply wait until November to vote for whoever the Democrats happened to nominate. With so many excellent candidates available, and the Republicans stuck recycling retreads, I felt like I could have been happy with just about any of the Democratic choices, although I still feel that the strongest ticket the Democrats might have nominated this year would have been Gore/Edwards.

But between the historic candidacies of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, 2008 seemed destined to produce something very different. In fact, just before I went into the hospital I found myself hoping for a dream ticket of Obama/Clinton, which would combine the exciting, youthful charismatic vision of the first African American President with the seasoned experience of the former First Lady and Junior Senator from New York. All it would have taken is for Hillary to recognize that the mood of the nation was moving in a different direction, and to set aside her own personal ambitions for the sake of the country....

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Convention. And this sideshow over Jeremiah Wright typifies everything that is wrong with our electoral process in general, and with the Democratic party in particular.

But first just a simple observation. If agreeing with everything that the preacher has to say is a requirement for remaining a member of a particular church, most of us would be preaching to pretty sparse congregations. The prophetic voice is not the voice of reason and moderation; it is a voice which speaks out loudly for those who are not able to speak out for themselves, and which attempts to speak THAT truth to power. Of course the preacher should be outrageous. Outrage is our stock in trade; if you aren't outraged, you aren't paying attention.

Politics, on the other hand, are about the art of the possible, and creating coalitions of compromise that can move the country forward toward the 80% that we can all agree on. In politics, idealism must always be tempered by realism, and the willingness to settle for the partial good. But when "electability" begins to trump vision and purpose, and the conversation is all about the horse race rather than the policies, and candidates are pilloried for daring to express a controversial idea out loud....well, it's outrageous in a different way. A much more dangerous way.

So, cross my fingers and support Barack, or hold my nose and vote for Hillary? Or pray that the superdelegates come to their senses, and ask Al Gore and John Edwards to pick up the mantle of leadership, and rescue their party from the politics of personal destruction....

Where are those pain pills when I need them?

The Resurrection and the Life

2008-03-21T10:54:00.001-04:00

My apologies for having to share such private and personal news in such a public and impersonal way, but one of the few drawbacks of being blessed with so many good friends is that the task of trying to contact all of you individually is simply overwhelming. A few weeks ago I went to see my physician after waking up in the middle of the night and noticing that I was coughing up blood. A subsequent chest x-ray and other diagnostic testing revealed a malignant tumor approximately the size of a tennis ball in my right lung. Obviously, I would have much rather learned that I had just won the Powerball Jackpot, but the good news is that even though this cancer is relatively advanced, it can still be treated. And so I'm scheduled to begin my chemotherapy the week after Easter. I've also started a "cancer blog" at http://onedayisle.blogspot.com which I hope you will all take the time to visit and explore. And please leave your comments and good wishes. I look forward to hearing from you!

Tim

For Political Junkies

2008-02-29T04:02:00.001-05:00

Thank you Onion, for this [warning: contains spoilers].

Actually, I prefer the Bavarian Creme....

2008-02-22T12:35:00.001-05:00

And I drink my Dunkin Donuts coffee black, or with cream only.

I can actually still remember the first time I ordered coffee and a doughnut at the Dunkin Donuts store on Boylston Street, just down the block from the Massachusetts Historical Society.

"Regular?" the clerk asked, and when I said yes (assuming, being from Seattle, regular coffee meant black coffee) and got it back with cream and two sugars....

Just another small moment of culture shock from the summer of 1980....(and for what it's worth, this quiz has me typed with a capital "T")

You Are a Boston Creme Donut

You have a tough exterior. No one wants to mess with you.

But on the inside, you're a total pushover and completely soft.

You're a traditionalist, and you don't change easily.

You're likely to eat the same doughnut every morning, and pout if it's sold out.

What Donut Are You?

European Dream

2008-02-19T10:33:00.002-05:00

One of the waitresses at the local restaurant where I like to eat breakfast is going to Paris next month with her boyfriend, who now has a little cash in his pocket having just given up his dream of becoming a rock musician, and selling his guitars on e-Bay. So I wrote up a little itinerary of Ten Days in (and around) Paris for a Young Couple in Love and now would like to invite others to read and add your comments.

Also, if you keep scrolling down you're also welcome to read the letters I wrote while living abroad for a semester as a visiting Doctoral Fellow at Aalborg University in Denmark in 2000.

A Seldom Appreciated Ancillary Benefit of a Good Seminary Education

2008-02-19T08:47:00.002-05:00

On Monday nights the neighborhood sports bar around the corner from my apartment hosts a "trivia night," where patrons can win up to $40 in free food in what amounts to a two hour contest between teams of up to six members to answer more questions correctly than anyone else in the bar, all in an attempt to sell more beer and buffalo wings now that Monday Night Football is over for the season. Last Monday I wandered in just to catch a bite to eat, ran into a couple of friends I'd met watching the World Series last October, and we decided to form a team...and finished just out of the money (mostly I think because we were being so convivial we weren't really concentrating on the "game" part of the quiz).

So we decided that we would meet up again this week with our game faces on, and see whether we could be a little more competitive than we were on our first night out. Unfortunately though, both of my team mates stood me up, which meant that I had to take on the entire bar all by myself....

You can see where this is going, right?

Yes, it's true -- all by his lonesome the good Reverend Doctor gave all comers a sound intellectual thrashing, blowing away the competition with his obscure knowledge of history, geography, science, pop culture, literature, movies, mythology and yes, even Rock and Roll trivia (I mean, did YOU know that Jimi Hendrix served in the 101st Airborne division before making Rock and Roll history at Woodstock?). In fact, they even tell me I set a new record high score, with 108 out of 142 possible points. And the worst part is, I know if my team mates had been there with me, we probably could have scored at least another dozen...and perhaps as many as 20. I'm sure one of THEM would have known the difference between the chemical names for Prozac and Viagra.

Of course, even as I bask in the glow of my triumph, there's a little voice whispering in my ear "Do you really need to eat another $40 worth of beer and wings? Do you really need to eat another $40 worth of beer and wings...."

Happy Danes!

2008-02-18T08:44:00.006-05:00

Just finished watching a "60 Minutes" interview with Tal Ben-Shahar, Harvard's "Professor of Happiness" who teaches a course for undergraduates on Positive Psychology that apparently fills Saunders Theater every semester. I've been a big admirer of Martin Seligman's theory of "Learned Optimism" (along with the entire closely-related Cognitive Therapy movement at Penn) from almost the day the book was originally published, so it's kind of exciting to see the movement gaining such widespread popularity. And I'm particularly delighted to learn that Danes tend to be the happiest people in the "developed" world. Those clever Danes. Despite having the highest suicide rate in the world (and all without a handgun to be found anywhere in the country), they really do know how to have a good time.

Here are Tal Ben-Shahar's "Six Tips for Happiness" (adapted and expanded from an article by Cindy Sher in the JUF (Jewish United Fund/Metro Chicago) News.)

1. Give yourself permission to be human. Embrace painful emotions for what they are, a natural consequence of being alive, rather than trying to suppress or deny them. When we accept emotions such as fear, sadness, or anxiety as natural expressions of being human, we are more likely to be able to integrate them into the larger context of our lives. Rejecting our emotions, positive or negative, leads to frustration and unhappiness. The only people who don't feel emotional pain are sociopaths and the dead.

2. Happiness lies at the intersection between pleasure and meaning. Whether at work or at home, the goal is to engage in activities that are both personally significant and enjoyable. When this is not feasible, make sure you have happiness boosters, moments throughout the week that provide you with both pleasure and meaning. The activities we find both pleasurable and meaningful will vary from person to person, from culture to culture, and even within the same individuals at different stages in their lives. But the importance of healthy pleasure and worthwhile activity remain constant no matter who you are or where you live.

3. Keep in mind that happiness is mostly dependent on our state of mind. Barring extreme circumstances, our level of well-being is determined by what we choose to focus on (the full or the empty part of the glass) and by our interpretation of external events. For example, do we view failure as catastrophic, or do we see it as a survivable learning opportunity which will contribute directly to our eventual success? This is a much more sophisticated idea than simply "the power of positive thinking." How we CHOOSE to frame our experience, by letting go of responsibility for things that are beyond our control, while accepting control of the things we can change (basically, the Serenity Prayer) determines our ability to place failure in context while owning our success. Universalizing the negative ("I'll NEVER be happy") while minimizing positive things (like the importance of healthy relationships) is probably the most significant "thinking error" people make. So do what your mother always told you to do: shake it off, and go find a sympathetic shoulder to cry on until it's out of your system.

4. Simplify! Simplify! Thoreau had this one right two centuries ago. We Americans in particular are generally too busy trying to squeeze in more and more activities into less and less time. Quantity influences quality, and we compromise on our happiness by trying to do it all. It is indeed possible to have too much of a good thing. And even if you could have it all, you wouldn't want it all at once.

5. Remember the mind-body connection. This is the corrective to the most frequent misunderstanding of #3. We are so accustomed to thinking about "mind over matter" and the importance of will-power that we often overlook that the mind-body connection works in both directions. What we do (or don't do) with our bodies influences our state of mind. Regular exercise, adequate sleep, and healthy eating habits lead to both physical and mental health. If you are feeling strong, energetic, and full of life, it is much easier to maintain a positive outlook on the world than it is if you are constantly feeling tired, run-down, and "puny."

6. Express gratitude whenever possible. We too often take our lives for granted. Learn to appreciate and savor the wonderful things in life, from people to food, from nature to a smile. Keep a "gratitude journal" and write in it every night, listing at least five things large or small that you are personally thankful for this day. "Appreciation" is not just the ability to admire something for what it is, it is also the GROWTH that takes place over time as we become more accustomed to wanting the things we have, rather than craving things we see on TV but can never truly possess. Managing our expectations and desires so that they conform with reality, and appreciating life for the miracle that it is (in gratitude, pleasure, and with simply joy rather than resentment, disappointment, and bitter frustration) is the basic secret of True Happiness -- the intersection of Pleasure and Meaning. Americans are notoriously ambitious, competetive, aquisitive and discontent...so it's no wonder that we tend to rank toward the bottom of the happiness scale. We could all learn a lesson from the Danes. Who says high taxes, wind turbines, and socialized, universal health care are bad things?...

Vive La Différence!

2008-02-14T16:00:00.004-05:00

a Special Valentine's Day Bonus Cross-Post.

The lovely and talented PeaceBang (who writes a blog, "Beauty Tips for Ministers," that people actually read) recently returned home from her annual mid-winter sunbreak (this year in Florida) lovestruck and with a new SweetieBang in tow, and wrote a lovely soliloquy regarding the successful search for true love at mid-life.

The mysteriously anonymous "Dutch Treat" responded with a weirdly worthy (PB's words, not mine) set of observations expressing a somewhat more cynical and "masculine" point of view, which in turn inspired PB to post one more time about the spiritual discipline of kissing frogs and the enduring search for that elusive brass ring of fidelity and commitment, which ended with a set of Stephen Sondheim lyrics that could have only been more inspiring if PB had actually sung them for us personally.

Now, just for giggles, I've cut and pasted the whole dialogue here (mostly since I couldn't quite figure out how to put in only the appropriate links to the original posts). Enjoy! And let it be known, just for the record, when I take PB out to dinner, I ALWAYS pick up the check.

***
PEACEBANG

The manic mind of the minister -- Auntie Mame meets Cotton Mather. Blogging about Unitarian Universalism, UU Christian spiritual practice, occasional cultural and political ravings, and the inner life of ministry. PeaceBang is the alter ego of a small town pastor serving a historic New England Unitarian Universalist congregation.

Re-entry Mode And Thoughts On Romantic Timing
January 27, 2008 on 6:43 pm

Hello ‘Bangers,

Here’s hoping that you’re all well and staying warm.

I am in re-entry mode after a lovely Florida vacation, courtesy of some very generous friends who gave me and a colleague pal the use of their condo. I’m not officially back to work until Tuesday which is nice and gives me some time to unpack, do the grocery shopping, and to curse the gods for their obnoxious sense of humor.

It’s just that, you see, Cupid got out one of his biggest, baddest arrows while I was away and hit me and a perfectly innocent other party with it, so now there’s a little jet stream of romance mojo moving north and south between Massachusetts and Southern Florida. A convenient 1,555 miles apart, that’s all. Well, we’ll see. And he doesn’t even own a computer, so there’s no chance of him seeing this, in case you were worried.

If you’ve been reading this blog for any amount of time, you’ve been through a few romances with me. Well, let’s say that you’ve been through about 100 bad dates alluded to, sporadic musings on the loneliness of the single life, and many reflections on the special challenges of the single minister.

I have tried not to chronicle every twinge of “gee, I might have met someone special” with my readers — because SisterBang and other pals have always been there to indulge those insecure, ad infinitum ramblings with — and also because no one needs to hear about the ups and downs of a clergywoman’s mostly non-existent dating life and romantic rejections . It’s neither appropriate nor interesting.

But let me offer this: I believe that chemistry is real and that it matters. I believe that kindred spirits and soul mates are real. I believe that we spend many years believing in the well-meant but totally cock-eyed interpretation of us handed down by family lore and old relationships, and that as soon as we jettison all that — really flush it down the toilet for good, it is possible for love to come, and to last. It is that latter process — not having a baby, not getting married, not getting our first paycheck — that makes us truly adult, and makes us truly free for true love to find us.

I have no idea if my new friend from Florida will be a true love. I’m not speaking of what is, but what I believe could be — if not now, maybe later. If not for me, God willing, for thee.

It takes a tremendous amount of work and effort to understand, accept and really know ourselves — to consider the input from those who know us (or think they do) along with our own knowledge of self, and to come up with an accurate and fair assessment of our own character and soul, needs, wants and responsibilities. It takes even harder work than that to hold that authentic person in affectionate and compassionate care, to move beyond the fear and woundedness that comes from being disappointed and treated insensitively, to stop dwelling on past failures, and to trust that God truly has made a unique and precious gift in us that deserves to be honored, and whose deepest recesses are known only to the silent soul. These private places of the soul should not be pried open by curious onlookers or cold-hearted Lotharios who pursue profound confidences in the same fashion that the paparazzi pursue the latest lurid photos of Britney Spears.

Many women have been socialized to gather the opinions of their friends and family when it comes to every subject from how to make a particular recipe, to what they should wear on a first date, to whether or not they should marry, to what career they should pursue next. This kind of intimate and constant gab can be deeply bonding and intimate, but it can also breed the exhaustion and mild contempt that comes with over-exposure to someone else’s vulnerability. At times the best thing for a woman is to cut off, or to be taken off this kind of life-support (however cruel that sounds) and to stand in her own truth for awhile. Not just to cultivate wisdom through spiritual practice and attention to her intuition (which she should be doing already), but to actively assess and, if need be, reject the version of herself assembled by her circle of intimates and to shore up her confidence in the true version; the woman she finally, after many years of hard and honest work, knows she is.

How can I ask someone to love me for better or for worse, unless I can love and accept myself through my own better or worse? Cliched to say it, but I owe my true friends the gift of finally getting it through my thick head that even at our “worst,” we all deserve to be treated sensitively and with compassion, and that love at its most basic means sticking-by. The lesson has finally stuck. Thanks, pals. You know who you are. What Jesus has been trying to convince me of for all these years, you have made real. Wouldn’t it be nice to have the opportunity to practice that spiritual discipline with a Sig Other?

Let’s just say this: if I do ever find true love I would want it to be just like this: during a time of radical emotional freedom and healing, of feeling particularly clear on who I am, what I need and how I want and expect to love and be loved. So no matter what happens with this particular conflagration, as the old song goes, “They Can’t Take That Away From Me.”

Oh, and you know that check-list that so many of us carry around in our heads about who we think we should be with? I’m re-assessing my approach to that. My checklist used to have 40 or so items on it. Now it has about 12:

My Ideal Mate

1. Should be kind and considerate.
2. Should know how to love and be loved, and that includes honesty, trust and loyalty.
3. Should have a great sense of humor.
4. Intelligence.
5. Some kind of cultural interests and talents.
6. Charisma.
7. Be attractive to me.
8. Be attracted to me.
9. Have nice manners.
10. Not be an active addict or criminal.
11. Be politically progressive and actively involved in a spiritual practice or community.
12. Makes my heart go thumpety-thump.

****
Comment by Dutch Treat — February 1, 2008 #

A dozen, down from forty? It’s no wonder some people think men and women come from different planets! Since adolescence my list has grown from one item to two:

1. Has nice tits (any size)
2. Not crazy (negotiable if tits are nice enough)

Seriously though, of course there has to be some sort of mutual attraction or the whole thing’s a non-starter.

Kind, considerate, well-mannered…sure, why not? I mean who wants to be with a cruel, rude and inconsiderate slob? (Oops. Forget I said that. Sorry I asked).

Intelligence and a great sense of humor are highly overrated. I frequently get turned down for dates by women who don’t think they’re smart enough for me. Good thing I can still laugh about it.

Let’s see, spiritually-aware progressive or drug-addicted criminal? I’m going to have to think about that one a little longer.

Making someone’s heart go thumpety-thump is not exactly something anyone can expect to do 24/7, not even movie stars. Some days (hell, these days most days) I’ll settle for a toe-curling climax. Although I have to admit that the next best thing is that sly half-grin and playful twinkle in the eye that reminds me of the last one, and makes me eager for the next.

Charisma? What exactly do you mean by “Charisma?” But I suppose you know it when you see it.

I guess if I were making a longer list (besides the cleavage and sanity thing, and skirting entirely the far more troubling issue of whether or not constant societal objectification eventually makes ALL women crazy), I would have to say that I generally go for smart and funny too — along with kind, considerate, sensitive, well-mannered, politically-progressive and great hair. And yes, she ought to be at least as into me as I’m into her…but not TOO much more — because that gets complicated too.

But mostly I’m just looking for someone who “gets” me — an adventurous soul, curious and generous, thankful, broad-minded, well-travelled and non-judgmental…and definitely not a prude either, although shy and slightly modest (or even a little demure) is probably a better fit than loud and profane.

Not that there’s anything wrong with loud and profane.

But at the end of the day, it really does come down to knowing how to love and be loved. And isn’t this really what we’re all trying to figure out anyway? Honesty. Loyalty. Trust-WORTHINESS. I’m surprised Fidelity didn’t make the list. For a lot of folks, that would have been #1. Not to mention plain and simple old fashioned “commitment.” But that’s what we're all supposed to be afraid of, right?

***

Being Alive: Reflections on The Search For Commitment
February 2, 2008 on 8:49 pm |

I wrote a few days ago about how Cupid done zinged me and a poor, unfortunate soul right in the soft, fleshy part of the heart while I was down in Florida, and Dutch Treat commented that I left “commitment” off of my list of Ideal Qualities for a mate. He said a lot of other worthy things, too, including suggesting that constant objectification may make all women crazy to one degree or another. Well said, brother, and thanks for the weirdly feminist solidarity there, ’cause I tend to agree with you.

I left “commitment” off my list because it was looming so large in my mind that I plumb forgot it. Of course, trustWORTHINESS and commitment. First. Foremost. Forever. How could I have forgotten to say so? What else is there in the end, and what else has been so painfully and sorely missing from all of my previous relationships? You can be in the big, glorious Love Shack all day long, but until someone says, “You and me, baby. You are the brass ring and I’m grabbing it, I’m coming for you, I’m launching myself over the castle walls of all the years of your bitter disappointments and coming to get you, ’cause you’re the prize,” all that billing and cooing and dopamine high is just a pleasant diversion, a sport, a delicious but ultimately unsatisfying meal. And, at my age, increasingly not worth the effort and the hurt. A girl can only get her hopes up so often before she loses some resilience and opts for quiet, peaceful nights with the cat over a ride on the dopamine rollercoaster.

Folks like me who have been dating for what seems like thousands of years are intensely weary of the “Shopping for a Mate” approach made particularly crass by on-line dating sites (scroll through the faces and descriptions, delete, delete, delete, scroll, scroll, scroll some more) and are intensely familiar with the issue of commitment, or lack thereof. We dress up for the Relationship Audition, doll up, get and give the once-over, hope to finally attract a decent companion who will hang around long enough to (however begrudgingly) come to care for us and to become the guy/gal who has GOT. OUR. BACK. Over many years, we come to understand that we have got our own backs, and that single life is wonderful in many ways. But still, for many of us, the hope lingers. We are fine on our own, but gee, wouldn’t it be great to have a Special Someone? Not just any old someone you’re settling for, but someone worthy of the effort it takes to be in a relationship?

While we search, here’s some of what chicks like me endure on those hundreds of dates:

1. No chemistry and occasionally nearly-fatal boredom. 2. We like him, he doesn’t like us; rejection. 3. Slight attraction, but no time or energy for a relationship. 4. He’s depressed, bitter and angry about divorce, needs a therapist, not a girlfriend. 5. Can’t stop talking about former relationships/guilt about being bad father to children. 6. Addictions, or constant reference to former addictions that obviously define his life and sense of self (not necessarily a character flaw, just can’t relate). 7. Major religious differences with obvious lack of respect for our beliefs; arrogant spiritual superiority. 8. Voted for George Bush, and would again. 9. Immediate, unwelcome pressure for sex/no interest in physical intimacy. 10. The scary drama queen- wants to marry you even though you’ve expressed not one iota of interest. 11. Sexy but obnoxious, irritates you even as he attracts you. 12. Funny, cute but totally passive, dating him finally feels like dragging 200 lbs. of potatoes behind us on a little red wagon. 13. Charming, sexy and attentive but just a low-down, cheating lying dawg in the end. 14. Intimidated by successful women/unsupportive of your life (in my case, considers the Church competition for my time, love and attention). 15. Just a loser you would never have wasted your time on if you hadn’t been so lonely (Yes, God loves him but he’s got nothing whatsoever to offer you).

This is how I’ve spent the past 15 years. One item to represent each year. I could go on, of course. The inappropriate crushes. The ones who seem great from a distance (such an impressive resume!) but are really sleazy characters up close. The egotists and the closet cases, the controllers, the ones with no listening skills, the naughty ones you shouldn’t have messed with but couldn’t resist.

You have to kiss a lot of frogs, kids. So let’s hear some good news! Let’s hear about the couples who met and knew, before very long that they had found the brass ring, let’s hear about the ones who clicked and made it stick, the ones who found each other, who spoke “commitment” not as a dirty word but as a delicious caress on the ear. Let’s hear about those of you who dated for as long as I have and at long last met someone whose integrity and goodness your heart could immediately detect even through thick, crusty layers of hurt, disappointment, bitterness and cynicism. Let’s hear about trust, and how your soul can feel that it has come home in someone’s presence, let’s hear it for love in time for Valentine’s Day. Why not? We certainly hear enough bad news about it; let’s sit around the PeaceBang fire and share some of the quiet, unreported tales of happiness between two people.

You do that, and while you do, dig these lyrics by master Broadway genius Stephen Sondheim who wrote this song for the musical “Company,”

BEING ALIVE

Someone to hold you too close
Someone to hurt you too deep
Someone to sit in your chair
And ruin your sleep
And make you aware of being alive
Someone to need you too much
Someone to know you too well
Someone to pull you up short
And put you through hell
And give you support for being alive-being alive
Make me alive, make me confused
Mock me with praise, let me be used
Vary my days, but alone is alone, not alive!
Somebody hold me too close
Somebody force me to care
Somebody make me come through
Ill always be there
As frightened as you of being alive,
Being alive, being alive!
Someone you have to let in
Someone whose feelings you spare
Someone who, like it or not
Will want you to share a little, a lot of being alive
Make me alive, make me confused
Mock me with praise, let me be used
Vary my days, but alone is alone, not alive!
Somebody crowd me with love
Somebody force me to care
Somebody make me come through
Ill always be there
As frightened as you to help us survive,
Being alive, being alive, being alive, being alive

I am SO ready...

2008-02-13T18:58:00.001-05:00

for winter to be over. Last night's storm was the most annoying yet; probably 8 inches of wet, heavy snow, and of course the snowplow buried my recycling before the garbage collector could collect it...then about 9 am the snow switched over to freezing rain, and then not-so-freezing rain, and now after nightfall the street outside my house is like a river. Not a slow, lazy, meandering river either. A rushing river....

Needless to say, Princess Parker is not pleased. But I don't think I'd be too happy either if I had to strip naked and poop in snow up to my chest. At least the local firefighters had the good manners to come shovel out a hydrant for her!

Clearly, not a fit night out for man nor beast. And our little household is one of each....

From Toast of the Town...

2008-02-02T18:21:00.000-05:00

to Just Toast. I wish I could say I wrote that, but it's actually something I saw on-line linking to a story about Rudy Giuliani's recent withdrawal from the Presidential campaign. Still, there's nothing I like better than a clever, well-turned phrase. Seems a pity to squander it on the washed-out aspirations of a washed-up Mayor. Even if he was the Mayor of New York City.

Maybe the Romans did say it better. Sic Gloria Transit Mundi Usually translated as "All Glory is Fleeting," but perhaps better expressed as "thus goes worldly glory." Three things all human beings have in common: each of us is unique, none of us is perfect, all of us are going to die. It's important to remember in our moments of triumph, when we stand out above the admiring crowd, that in the end we all become one with the dust from whence we came. As Kurt Vonnegut put it, "so it goes." The details are merely incidental.

And yet, God is also in the details. In the face of death and with painfully-full awareness of our own imperfections, we remain the fortunate recipients of this amazing gift of life itself: this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to live, to love, to indulge in the pleasures of our senses and explore wherever our curious imaginations may lead us -- to weigh the worth and value of all we encounter, make judgments, make choices, make a difference in the world. We are born blind, helpless and completely dependent upon the care of others, aware only of the power of our own appetites. How we live from that moment forward to the moment of our death is the product of a great many things beyond our control, but ultimately we alone are charged with the privilege and the duty, the right and the responsibility, the opportunity and the obligation to determine what our lives will mean in the greater scheme of the universe.

Kinda seems a little overwhelming, doesn't it? But you know, that's just the way life is sometimes....

CAMBODIAN ORPHAN UPDATE

2008-02-01T05:53:00.000-05:00

In the last few hours of this contest, The Sharing Foundation surged from out of the money into first place, with over 1700 unique individual contributors (approximately 300 of whom came forward to donate on the last day). You can see the unofficial final results below. Thanks so much to all of you who helped make this possible! Small acts of generosity by large numbers of people can indeed make great things happen.

Global Giving Challenge Leaderboard (unofficial final results)

ROUTE OUT OF POVERTY FOR CAMBODIAN CHILDREN

2008-01-31T09:26:00.000-05:00

So here's today's big chance to do one small thing to make the world a little bit better place for us all. But don't think about it too long, because the contest ends today at High Noon, Pacific Standard Time (that's 3 pm here on the East Coast). It's only going to cost you $10, and is going to make a huge difference in the lives of some very small children; so if you could find it in your heart to take five minutes to make a donation and then e-mail your own friends, it would be a very good thing. And personally, I would LOVE to be able to say that it was MY friends who put them over the top and into the money.

Donate to the Sharing Foundation

Compliments of my younger brother (a Wall Street investment banker)

2008-01-26T16:42:00.001-05:00

This was forwarded to me this afternoon, and is apparently making the rounds on Wall Street. Nice to know that investment bankers have a sense of irony too....

This year, both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union Address fall on the same day.

It is an ironic juxtaposition: one involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of little intelligence for prognostication.

The other involves a groundhog.

I WON THE LOTTERY!!!

2008-01-25T13:45:00.001-05:00

OK, so it was only $10. Still, as my Dad used to say, it's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. I first started playing the Powerball when I was still commuting to graduate school in Oregon, and was buying gas two or three times a week at various filling stations and convenience stores all along the I-5 corridor. It didn't take that much more time simply to hand the clerk an extra $5 and my play-slip, and play my numbers for another couple of weeks every few tankfulls. I figured I probably got at least that much entertainment value daydreaming as I drove along the Interstate about what I would do with the $100 million if my numbers ever actually hit. (There used to be a billboard about half-way between Portland and Eugene that displayed the predicted amount of the next jackpot, so I always knew exactly how much money I stood to win.) And besides, my Daddy also always used to tell me that "the lottery is simply a tax on the mathematically illiterate." But you know? -- I think that's probably a tax I owe....

When I moved back east in 2001, I discovered that in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts they have something called a "season ticket," where you can pay $90 at the beginning of the year and play your numbers 104 times: every Wednesday and Saturday drawing for an entire calendar year. Not only was it way more convenient, but I got a discount too! So what if the prize wasn't quite as large as the Powerball? It certainly didn't effect the quality of my daydreaming one little bit.

I don't really consider the lottery "gambling," because I don't really have anything at risk. I consider the money I pay for my ticket gone the moment it leaves my hand -- an act of public charity in support of schools and economic development and whatever other good causes those revenues are used for. And likewise, any money that may happen to come back my way is simply a windfall gift of grace. Gambling is going without adequate health insurance so you can afford food and heating oil, or creating privatized Social Security retirement accounts based on the assumption that stocks will continue to rise forever. I don't like to play cards or visit casinos, I don't bet on sporting events (except maybe for filling out an NCAA Final Four bracket every year, or an occasional "honor" bet with other clergy I know when our home-town teams are competing for a championship), I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in horse racing or dog racing or cock fighting (or dog fighting!) or any of the other various "bloodsports" which "Sporting Men" have traditionally wagered on over the years. In fact, the whole culture of gambling kinda creeps me out.

I know a lot of people play the lottery so they can dream about quitting their jobs. But most clergy I know, whether they play or not, basically daydream about what it would be like to be able to do their jobs PROPERLY without having to fret about the constant hassle of money in the first place! And I'm also amazed by the widespread cultural assumption that if by some strange twist of fate a minister does come in to "sudden money" (whether in the lottery, or on a game show, or even through their own hard work or by winning some sort of merit-based prize), that they will give away a good portion of their new-found wealth to the church and to other "good causes."

Frankly, I suspect that if I ever DID come into a significant amount of money, I would actually find the experience kind of overwhelming, and that my biggest struggle would be figuring out how best to hold on to the things about my current lifestyle that I value most now. Sure, it would be nice to be able to pay off my car loan, and my kids' student loans, and maybe even those of my brother's kids as well. I would probably start shopping a little more seriously for a house (which is something I probably ought to be doing anyway, except that I really like the apartment I'm living in now), and I would definitely travel more, and probably even buy a boat. All things I could no doubt afford to do already, if I wasn't so distracted and preoccupied by the day to day demands of earning a living by trying to do good instead of doing well. I would certainly be paying a lot more money to lawyers and accountants than I would ever dream of doing now. And yes, I would probably give away a good portion of the money to churches and other "good causes." I mean, why would I want to change what I'm trying to do already?

But the real truth is, I won the lottery the day I was born. And I've known for a long, long time now just how lucky I truly am, and how little I really deserve it, and how much of my own relative comfort and prosperity is rooted, ultimately, in the economic exploitation of less-fortunate souls whom I will in all likelihood never meet or even see unless I actively seek them out. And at the same time, I wonder how many of my own frustrations regarding the compensation practices of my previous congregation were really just rooted in my own deeply-felt sense of class privilege and entitlement, and a sort of fundamental resentment about feeling treated like a "servant" by people who are significantly more wealthy than I've chosen to be, and who feel that entitles them to certain special privileges of their own.

Anyway, saw this meme on another blog, and thought I'd fill it out...with reflections, of course.

[*From What Privileges Do You Have?, based on an exercise about class and privilege developed by Will Barratt, Meagan Cahill, Angie Carlen, Minnette Huck, Drew Lurker, Stacy Ploskonka at Illinois State University. If you participate in this blog game, they ask that you PLEASE acknowledge their copyright.]

Bold the true statements.

1. Father went to college.

2. Father finished college.

3. Mother went to college.

4. Mother finished college.

5. Have any relative who is an attorney, physician, or professor.

Of course, what really amazes me about question five is how "professor" has replaced "minister" on the traditional list of "learned professions." Clergy were the original professional "professors of faith," whose knowledge of ancient languages entitled them to profess doctrine as "doctors of the church." To practice Law you needed to read Latin. To practice Medicine you needed to read Latin and Greek. But to profess Theology you needed to be fluent in Greek, Latin and Hebrew...which in colonial New England towns often made the minister both the community physician and the designated "arbitrator of disputes" as well.

6. Were the same or higher class than your high school teachers.

Yes, it's true -- I attended one of those High Schools where the student parking lot contained MUCH nicer vehicles than those in the faculty parking lot. Which is why I always tried to park in the faculty lot myself....

7. Had more than 50 books in your childhood home.

8. Had more than 500 books in your childhood home.

500 books is a helluva lot of books, and I never actually counted them all up, but I suspect there were at least 500. By the time I left for college, I probably owned close to 200 books myself. And of course, now, I own considerably more than that. This question would probably make my own children laugh out loud....

9. Were read children's books by a parent.

10. Had lessons of any kind before you turned 18.

11. Had more than two kinds of lessons before you turned 18.

Swimming lessons and trumpet lessons (which came through the school). Kinda wish I'd had more. But my mom had all sorts of "advantages" pressed upon her when she was a little girl, and I suspect that she wanted to spare her own children that experience. And of course my Dad HADN'T, and probably felt they were a little over-the-top. So I never had to learn how to play the piano. Although I suppose it's never too late to start.

12. The people in the media who dress and talk like me are portrayed positively.

"Positive" is in the eye of the beholder. I would probably be a pretty strong candidate for a "Queer Eye" makeover.

13. Had a credit card with your name on it before you turned 18.

This is kind of tricky, but I'm going to say "no." I did open my own checking account when I started college at age 17, and it came with an ATM card...but not the kind of ATM/debit card you see today. I didn't get a credit card until I turned 21, and started graduate school.

14. Your parents (or a trust) paid for the majority of your college costs.

15. Your parents (or a trust) paid for all of your college costs.

These are also kind of tricky, since I went to college/graduate school for a VERY long time. My parents paid 100% of the first two years of my undergraduate education at the University of Washington (where in-state tuition in those days was $188/quarter). My final two years my tuition and books were paid by my grandmother, and I covered my own Room and Board costs by working as a Residence Hall Advisor. I also earned spending money through a variety of other summer and part-time jobs, but I never (for example) had to spend my summers working in a salmon cannery in Alaska like so many of my friends did, and as a result I was always able to make school my first priority, and never really had to worry when the term bill came due. I did, by the way, physically write all of the checks to pay those bills myself (which was why I had my own checking account); and whatever money that came from my parents was contingent upon me making continuous progress towards my degree and maintaining a certain GPA, neither of which were ever especially problematic for me. Most of my post-Graduate education was paid for through a combination of grants, loans, scholarships, fellowships, internships, teaching assistantships, and other part-time employment. After awhile, school basically became just another highly-interesting, relatively low-paying (but with great benefits) job for me. So yes, I confess: I was a "professional student." And I was really pretty good at it too.

16. Went to a private high school.

I attended Newport High School in Bellevue, Washington -- a public High School routinely rated by Newsweek magazine as one of the top twenty High Schools in the country. Which really amazes me every time I see those rankings. It sure wasn't that way when I went there. Nearly attended the Lakeside Academy (with Bill Gates and Paul Allen) my Senior year (long story for another day), but my Dad decided it would be more cost-effective simply to bribe me to work harder where I was (see below). Who knows how my life might have been different if he had chosen the other option.

17. Went to summer camp.

But not a lot. My folks didn't really believe in it. And we had this great house at the beach (which belonged to my Grandmother) that was a lot better than camp anyway. But sometimes day camp. Or Scout camp. After the end of Little League season, of course.

18. Had a private tutor before you turned 18.

19. Family vacations involved staying at hotels.

Our family vacations typically involved visiting other family members, and staying with them.

20. Your clothing was all bought new before you turned 18.

Of course, I was the oldest child, which meant there was nobody to hand clothes down to me. Except my cousins. And my mom was a fantastic seamstress. But mostly my clothes were bought new. And God how I hated to shop!

21. Your parents bought you a car that was not a hand-me-down from them.

This is a both/and answer. My first car was a hand-me-down from my mother, a 1962 Red Plymouth Valiant Station Wagon (with a push-button gear shift). But my parents also bought me a car of my own (a used Triumph sports car, no less) as a reward/bribe for improving my High School grades to a 4.0 from their dismal slacker levels my junior year.

22. There was original art in your house when you were a child.

23. You and your family lived in a single-family house.

24. Your parent(s) owned their own house or apartment before you left home.

25. You had your own room as a child.

26. You had a phone in your room before you turned 18.

Again, my parents didn't believe in private phones for kids. And I didn't really spend a lot of time on the phone as a teenager anyway.

27. Participated in a SAT/ACT prep course.

28. Had your own TV in your room in high school.

29. Owned a mutual fund or IRA in high school or college.

30. Flew anywhere on a commercial airline before you turned 16.

31. Went on a cruise with your family.

32. Went on more than one cruise with your family.

These cruise questions are also tricky -- I've NEVER been on a "cruise" per se, even as an adult, and I'm not so sure that I would ever really want to. But my parents owned a boat when I was a teenager, and we "cruised" in the San Juan Islands pretty much every summer. Does that count?

33. Your parents took you to museums and art galleries as you grew up.

34. You were unaware of how much heating bills were for your family.

Absolutely. In fact, I was pretty much unaware of ALL my family's household expenses (and income) growing up. And ironically, it was a disagreement over who was supposed to pay for the heating oil at the parsonage in my last settlement that was at the root of my eventual disillusionment with that congregation, and my decision to seek a new position at a different church instead.

Strange Bookends

2008-01-24T16:41:00.000-05:00

Cowardice asks the question, "Is it safe?"

Expediency asks the question, "Is it politic?"

Vanity asks the question, "Is it popular?"

But, conscience asks the question, "Is it right?"

And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because one's conscience tells one that it is right. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

***

Never judge another man until you have walked a mile in his shoes. That way, if he takes exception to your opinion, you've got a mile-long head start, and he's barefoot.... -- Anonymous

Wrong AND disliked....

2008-01-11T14:03:00.000-05:00

A few months ago (inspired in large degree by a workshop I attended by Marie Fortune on working pastorally with the survivors of domestic abuse) I posted an entry on this blog describing some of my reflections and experiences about having voluntarily censored an even earlier post in which I described some of my experiences transitioning out of the congregation I had previously served in Carlisle, Massachusetts. As part of that second post, there was one paragraph in particular where I recounted in some detail the amount of money I felt accepting that call had cost me over the four years I served there, which included the statement “Finally there's the four years without a raise or a COLA, and the nearly six grand they decided to stiff me by refusing to pay me through the entire three months of the contractual 90 day severance period.”

Not long after that post appeared, I received an e-mail from UUA Settlement Director John Weston offering to help mediate my dispute with my former congregation, with the assistance of UUA Office of Church Staff Finances Director Ralph Mero and Clara Barton District Executive Lynn Thomas. Naturally, I jumped at the offer. Now this group (all of whom I respect deeply) has met, and guess what? I was wrong. Even though everything I had described in that post was factually correct (and to my knowledge, undisputed), apparently because I had already started my new ministry in Portland Maine on August 1st the panel determined that my former congregation was NOT obligated to pay me in full through the entire 90-day severance period stipulated by the Letter of Agreement, as I had thought at the time. Furthermore, my willingness to air all this dirty laundry in a public blog was felt to be manipulative, and “unworthy of our ministry.”

So. Bitter medicine. You can read the entire text of John’s e-mail below (along with the lengthy response I wrote back to him), but first here’s my more concise and less defensive reaction. I didn’t become involved in this line of work thinking it would make me rich, but I did expect to be treated honestly and fairly. Scripture tells us to turn the other cheek and to give anyone who asks for it the shirt off our back, but let’s face it (Walter Wink’s brilliant exegesis of this passage notwithstanding) going through life feeling half naked and constantly slapped around is a helluva way to make a living. Is that really what I’ve signed up for? And if so...well, maybe I really OUGHT to be thinking about finding another line of work.

At the same time, I really love my job (most days); I believe I’m good at it; I believe it has given me some small opportunity to help make the world a better place by my presence in it. I try to take my vocation seriously, and I would never intentionally do anything to bring my sacred and revered profession into disrepute. So knowing that I am perceived that way by colleagues I respect gives me pause, and has caused me to re-examine some of my fundamental assumptions about both my motives and what I am attempting to accomplish in raising these issues, and even doing this work in the first place.

Devoting one’s life to attempting “To Speak the Truth to Power” is a pretty daunting undertaking. Because after all, What is Truth? I would have confidently testified under oath to everything I posted in those earlier blog entries, but who among us really knows “the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth?” And there have certainly been other unpleasant consequences to my decision to speak out openly about my experience the way I did, not the least of which are the random, anonymous “poison pen” comments that filter into this blog from time to time. Generally I just delete them, in part just to save the authors the embarrassment of their own words (My favorite was one which began “Are you a morom?”), but mostly I do it because I have absolutely no desire to stir up any more bad feelings than I already have. And of course, it also always amazes me that anyone actually reads this blog at all. I guess I’m not the first blogger to fall victim to THAT little illusion.

In any event, I do feel duly chastened and humbled, if not actually humilated, by this entire experience, and will now be very grateful to be able to put it all behind me. And if you do have something you would like to comment on in this blog, please be willing to sign your real name and have something positive to contribute, rather than simply making threats and calling me vile names.

The e-mail:

Clara Barton District Executive Lynn Thomas, UUA Church Staff Finance Director Ralph Mero, and I met on Monday January 7 to consider the claims that Tim has asserted against Carlisle:

The claims as Tim presented them:

$2364.00 - 27 days cash salary (July 25-Aug 20)

$1075.00 - 16 days Parsonage Allowance (Aug 4-Aug 20)

$1239.30 - Unreimbursed Professional Expenses (basically GA)

$ 990.00 - 27 days pro-rated Pension Contribution

$ 284.20 - UU-GIP insurance premium (July 1-Aug 20)***

We take up the claims in three categories:

1. that Carlisle owed Tim for a full 90 days of salary and housing and pension contribution following his giving notice

2. that Carlisle owed Tim for costs associated with the UUA General Assembly that exceeded his professional expense budget, and

3. that Carlisle owed Tim for utilities costs for the parsonage during his service in Carlisle

1. Tim resigned on May 21, giving, 90 days notice. However, his last day of service in Carlisle cannot have been later than July 31, since he started serving Portland on August 1. According to Carlisle treasurer Mary Hult, Carlisle compensated Tim for the full month of July. She writes:

I am sorry for the confusion on Rev. Tim Jensen's pay for July, 2007. All of our monthly checks say "period ending" somewhere between the 24th and 28th of the month. Largely, that is so the check can be printed by our payroll service and received by our employees by the first of the month. For some people, this has been very important.

Tim was on salary so his annual salary was basically divided into 12 months. Tim's pay stub might have said the 24th but, like all of the checks he received from us, it was for the entire month. His monthly checks for August-June 2007 were rounded up to $2,634 so the last check, for July 2007, was rounded down to $2,626 ($8 less) in order to end with the $31,600 annual salary total.

Thus we see no valid claim for salary and housing. We did not consider the pension and insurance premium issue.

2. We are not able to accept the premise that expenditures exceeding a budgeted amount create indebtedness. The time to address a budget shortfall is before the expenditure is incurred.

3. Attachment B of the agreement between Carlisle and Tim contains the provision that the utilities costs are included in the housing allowance.

Thus we are not able to validate any of your claims, Tim.

That said, I believe that the Carlisle leadership is entitled to know, Tim, that we find your public claims against the congregation to be unworthy of our ministry. Furthermore, the discord between you and the leadership having centered on money for some months if not years, your attempt to maneuver the Transitions Office into settling old scores is similarly unworthy. Given the publicity you have brought to this issue, we believe that you owe, immediately, a post on the Money chat and on your blog withdrawing the assertion of such claims against Carlisle.

Speaking for myself, I owe notice of our take on this issue to the ministers who have indicated interest in Carlisle in this year’s search round, and have started the notification process..

John Weston

My snotty and hot-headed (not really) reply:

Dear John

Having accepted in good faith your offer to mediate this dispute for me, I now feel obligated to honor your decision, although I could not be more disappointed with the result. But having also released this concern to the Universe during our annual First Sunday of the Year "Burning Ritual," I’m also not too inclined to complain much more about it either.

As you request, at my first opportunity I will post the text of your letter with its findings to both to my public blog and the Money-CHAT. I do wish however, simply for the sake of the historical/public record, to reiterate a few of my concerns that do not seem to have been explicitly addressed by your findings.

1) I may just be incredibly thick-headed (or perhaps just the opposite, that too much time in academia has made me hypersensitive to the nuanced subtleties of close analysis), but I still fail to understand the connection between your finding that because I started work here in Portland on August 1st I could not possibly have been serving the Carlisle congregation beyond July 31st, and your decision that this somehow relieves FRS of their contractual obligation to compensate me in full through the entire 90 day severance period stipulated in the Letter of Agreement. I accept your authority to make that determination (about what was really the only issue that mattered); I just don’t understand the logic of it.

The so-called "double-dip" has long been a reality in our movement, and although I certainly don’t have access to the hard data, my anecdotal understanding is that some of the most egregious double-dippers of all are in fact Accredited Interim Ministers, who are routinely paid in full through the month of August even though they have also often at that point already started new assignments somewhere else. From your knowledge, is this true, or have I been misinformed?

And if this is true, do your findings in my situation now obligate you to insist that all those ministers who have "double-dipped" in the past now return that money to the congregations they previously served?

Or to look at it another way, would your decision have been different if I had arbitrarily set my starting date in Portland as August 21st rather than the 1st? And do you honestly believe that FRS would have then happily and willingly paid me in full for the final month of my contract with them, during which I would have ordinarily been on vacation anyway?

2) The issue I raised regarding the professional expense budget and my unreimbursed General Assembly expenses referred specifically to the question of whether or not unreimbursed professional expenses incurred in one fiscal year might be "rolled-over" into the next fiscal year, a practice which had routinely been the policy at FRS until suddenly it wasn't.

As I believe I mentioned in an earlier e-mail to you, this same practice of rolling over expenses to the next fiscal year was the principal reason the 2006-07 professional expense budget came up short in the first place, all of which goes back to the underlying problem that the budget itself never actually met the fair compensation guidelines to begin with, and (like the rest of my compensation package) had not been adjusted the entire time I served there.

But to stick to the topic at hand, this practice of "roll-over" is once again a vestige of the bad old TCM days in which congregations and their ministers typically had a gentleman's agreement to handle professional expense accounts in this manner. The Carlisle congregation has never claimed that my expenses were not legitimate; they simply asserted that since they didn't budget for them, they weren't obligated to reimburse them. Can you imagine the result if the rest of the world adhered to this logic? My argument was that they were indeed contractually obligated to reimburse me for those expenses, whether they had budgeted for them or not, and that even under the old TCM paradigm there was (or should have been) sufficient money to do so in the 2007-08 budget.

3) I honestly can't recall having ever made any formal claims regarding the cost of utilities at the parsonage, unless it was in some way related to my request to be paid in cash 20 days equivalent of the Fair Rental Value of the parsonage (based on their expressed desire that I vacate the parsonage prior to August 20th -- which I accommodated at significant inconvenience and expense to both myself and my new congregation).

I have written elsewhere about my experience regarding the way I believed (and still believe) the parsonage utilities were (mis)handled in my original contract negotiations, and about the treasurer's subsequent unilateral decision to deduct the increased cost of heating oil from my cash salary, rather than absorbing it into the general church operating budget as called for by the compensation guidelines. But I have never asked or expected to be "made whole" in this regard; I simply mentioned it as an example of one of the ways I felt I was unfairly taken advantage of financially by that congregation during my tenure there.

***
The most disappointing aspect of this entire process has come right here at the end, with the easy way you seem to dismiss my legitimate desire to achieve a fair and impartial mediation of my complaints as "an attempt to maneuver the Department of Ministry into settling old scores," and characterize my willingness to raise these concerns in the first place as "unworthy of the ministry."

I am not the one who wrote the UUMA Guidelines, or set the Fair Compensation standards; I merely had the bad manners to mention them in public. I'm not the one who refused outright to meet with the District Compensation Consultant to discuss these issues early on in my ministry in Carlisle, or who declined to raise these sensitive issues with church leaders in a timely fashion because "they aren't ready to hear it," or who initiated any of the other "non-standard" employment practices I factually and accurately described in both earlier e-mails to you, and on rare occasion referenced (in what I believed at the time was an honest and balanced way) in various other public forums. I sincerely wish that a few of my former parishioners had given me a happier tale to tell. But since when is it "unworthy of the ministry" to tell the truth?

I never asked anyone to help me settle old scores; I simply asked for your help in resolving this issue of whether or not 90 days really means 90 days, or if it actually means something else. I do agree that it is unworthy both of our ministry and our movement in general that situations like the one I experienced in Carlisle continue to exist, and that there seems to be no good way of quietly and effectively resolving these disputes absent the good will of all the parties involved. I regret deeply any way that my own growing frustration with that situation may have influenced my ability to minister effectively to the members of that congregation, most of whom I consider wonderful people who certainly deserve the very best that any minister has to give them.

And I likewise hope that my willingness to speak openly about my experience in Carlisle will not dissuade other ministers from exploring a call to serve that congregation. If anything, I hope that bringing these issues out into the open will help head off any future problems similar to the ones I experienced, thus creating a more happy situation for all concerned.

And I will also say this: this entire experience has been extremely unpleasant for me personally, both as I suffered through it in silence and relative isolation at the time, and then later as I suffered the consequences of having spoken openly and candidly about it in public. It's not an experience I would wish on anyone, and certainly not one I would ever wish to experience again myself.

In any event John, as you share your "take" on these issues with other ministers currently in search, I hope you will also see fit to share a few final words to the wise. If something really matters, get it in writing. Well-intended promises and handshake deals aren't worth the paper they're not printed on. Don’t sign anything until you've had it reviewed by an attorney. YOUR attorney. If the Guidelines and the Fair Compensation standards, for example, are important to you, have them written right into the contract; that way, if you should ever (God forbid) feel the need to litigate, they will have the force of law, and not just the moral influence of custom and tradition.

We all would like to believe that our communities of faith aspire (and adhere) to higher, and more generous and compassionate standards of behavior than are typically found in the "real" world. Unfortunately, they often don't. And for what it's worth, the integrity and credibility of our entire movement suffers as a consequence. How does the saying go? -- "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere?" I freely admit that on the grand scale of things, the tiny injustices done to me in Carlisle are small potatoes, and that perhaps I am a small person for taking them to heart. Now they are behind us, and I have more important things to worry about, as I'm sure you do too. My apologies for having written so long a response; if I'd had more time I would have made it shorter.

In friendship,

Tim

N. Hawthorne on Concord MA

2007-12-28T14:50:00.000-05:00

"Never was a poor little country village invested with such a variety of queer, strangely dressed, oddly behaved mortals, most of whom took themselves to be important agents of the world's destiny, yet were simply bores of a very intense character."

Can't even remember where I originally saw this, but I jotted it down in my diary at the time, and now I share it with all of you. Enjoy!

Some Early Morning Reflections on the Longest (and Darkest) Night of the Year (and Soul)

2007-12-22T02:11:00.000-05:00

I've been thinking a bit more about some of the issues I've been ruminating over lately regarding privilege and entitlement, now that I've had a chance to sleep on them a little. Perhaps "afflicting the comfortable" really is just part of the job description of a minister, no matter how uncomfortable it may feel to all concerned. But (to quote a former parishioner) “who comforts the afflicter?” Clergy talk and talk until we are blue in the face about the importance of self-care and spiritual renewal, but when push comes to shove, who among us is truly brave enough to look to our own needs first when our people really need us?

I once believed that Ministry was a profession just like any other profession: grounded in the mastery and practice of a particular body of knowledge and set of skills. But after 25 years, I’ve come to understand that ministry is really about a set of relationships. A relationship with God (or whatever passes for “God” in your particular understanding of Universe), along with a calling to a higher purpose in service of a larger good. A relationship with an institutional organization, and to its historical traditions and values. A relationship with a community of people who have invited you to become their leader, teacher, coach and caregiver; and to individuals within that community, each of whom is continually making up their mind about whether or not they are willing to call you THEIR minister. It is a tremendous privilege to be addressed by the title "Reverend." But it's not a privilege we are entitled to by virtue of education or credential or expertise; rather, it's a title we have to earn again and again every day by being worthy of people's reverence. Which is certainly not a burden to be taken lightly.

Likewise, these relationships can be incredibly fulfilling, and profoundly rewarding in their own right. But like any relationship, they are also often destined to disappoint. Destined perhaps even to break people's hearts (including our own). It’s merely a natural consequence of the fact that nobody’s perfect. I know full well that my people aren't perfect, and that I’m not a perfect minister either. And even if I were, that still doesn’t mean that I’m going to be everyone’s cup of tea. No minister is. But that still doesn’t keep me from being a very good minister (or at least doing the best that I can)... even when I disappoint, or can’t quite live up even to my own expectations for myself.

In his book Put on Your Own Oxygen Mask First, Bill Easum talks about the dangers of a "high mercy gift." UU's are probably more comfortable talking about healthy boundaries, the dangers of co-dependence, and developing "serviceable Ministerial relationships," but I think the issues are pretty much the same. In my own mind, it's about finding the proper balance between "service" and "leadership" in the role of Servant Leader. This may just be my wise cynicism rearing its ugly head again, but I'd venture to guess that an awful lot of conflict between clergy and members of their congregations boils down to different expectations about who is going to lead and who is going to follow, and who expects to be served by whom. And I’m afraid that an awful lot of ministers I know tend to exude an aura of privilege and entitlement when they would really be much better off practicing humility and sacrifice.

But Privilege and Entitlement are not the exclusive property of ordained clergy. Not by a long shot. I’ve also seen way too often with my own two eyes how easily a minister’s willingness to sacrifice and serve humbly is subtly transformed into a kind of humiliating servitude. Not through malice or design. But by the unrealistic and unrelenting expectations of affluent, educated, “successful” people who are accustomed to getting what they want and to having things their own way. They come to church (when they aren’t doing something more important) for their weekly dose of inspiration and “intellectual stimulation,” and leave feeling good about themselves and all that they believe they stand for. But how many of them really practice what we preach? Or am I just naive to believe that this is any different than it should be?

What does it truly mean to be people of faith, serving as leaders in communities of faith, and practicing a particular faith tradition? That word “faith” is often interpreted as “belief without evidence,” but it’s so much more than that. It means confidence. It means trust. In Latin, it is “fidelity” -- a word which we have imported directly into English with nary a varied nuance. When we are unfaithful, and trust is broken, people lose confidence in us -- and it can happen in a heartbeat. Building Trust, on the other hand, often takes a great deal of time and effort and shared experience. Clergy can’t MAKE people trust them, although the role itself these days comes with both a great deal of implicit trust and a great deal of cultural suspicion built-in as standard equipment. The best we can do as individuals is to endeavor always and in all ways to be Trust-Worthy, and hope that those around us will see that for what it is.

And then comes the hardest part of the business of all: learning to trust ourselves. And funny how that phrase works both ways: learning ourselves how to trust others, and learning as well how to trust our own skills, abilities, knowledge, insights, motivations and “faithfulness.” This is where the discipline of learning how to give ourselves over to something larger than ourselves comes into play. And it isn’t easy. But who ever said that anything in life that is truly worthwhile is ever easy?

That's just the Cross-Eyed Bear...

2007-12-20T22:14:00.000-05:00

One of the challenges I've been wrestling with recently, both in my ministry and my own spiritual practice, is moving beyond the “wise cynicism” I’ve developed in more than a quarter-century of this strange and wonderfully frustrating work, so that I might somehow reconnect with the optimism, idealism and passionate enthusiasm which originally called me to this vocation in my youth.

Over the years I’ve managed to develop a pretty thick skin, and (at times, at least) a pretty jaded attitude. I’ve learned the hard way that “no good deed goes unpunished,” and how to remain so “non-anxious” and “non-reactive,” “non-defensive” and “self-differentiated” that people sometimes wonder whether I’m even paying attention. I’ve learned how to take criticism seriously without taking it personally, and that there are lots of things, both in life and at church, that I just can’t fix no matter how hard I try, and am better off simply learning how to live with and accept. I no longer harbor a lot of illusions about the true nature of my work. And yet in the midst of this "disillusionment," I sometimes find the work itself more and more difficult to do “in good faith.”

For example, I have become SO tired of feeling like I have to harangue, cajole, browbeat or shame basically good and decent people into doing the right thing simply because they are too stubborn, lazy, self-satisfied, comfortable and content to do the right thing on their own. This was basically the problem with my last congregation, and it was unpleasant for everyone concerned. And yet, for a lot of people, this is precisely what preachers are SUPPOSED to do, which is also, I suspect, the reason so many of them stay away from church in droves -- because they find the experience “too preachy.” Let’s face it, nobody really LIKES being preached to. Much less being preached at.

Likewise, one of the most difficult conundrums facing any leader is determining how quickly to try to move people forward. No matter what pace you choose to set, there are always going to be some folks who feel you’re going too fast, and others who feel like you’re not going fast enough. Getting everyone lined up, facing in roughly the same direction, and moving along the same path at approximately the same speed (more often than not when they aren’t even looking at the same page of the guidebook) can feel like an impossible chore. Is it best to try to lead from the front, holding high your shepherd’s staff while setting a brisk pace in the hope that the others will keep up on the journey to greener pastures? Or is one better off herding from behind, barking and nipping at the heels of the stragglers while keeping a wary eye open for the wolves in sheep’s clothing?

I know it’s a stereotype, but at least more "traditional" preachers had both a big carrot and an even bigger stick. Do the right thing, and you’ll be going to heaven; do something different, and you can go somewhere else. More recently, proponants of the so-called “prosperity gospel” have added promises of worldly wealth, success, health and happiness to the menu of pie in the sky when you die. It may seem a little hard for some of us to swallow, but a lot of folks are apparently gobbling it up with a spoon. Indeed, the traditional metaphor of "the shepherd and their flock" implicitly reinforces these stereotypes. "Sheep" who are incapable of thinking for themselves need a strong and decisive Pastor to tell them what to believe.

But if anything (at least in my experience) the typical members of UU congregations more closely resemble goats: frisky, nimble, curious, aggressive, highly independent, natural escape artists, and willing to swallow just about anything they can get their mouths around if given an opportunity. Yet even a herd of highly-heretical goats occasionally requires the services of a faithful goatherd:to keep them safe from predators, and properly groomed and fed; to track them down when they get loose and become lost or hurt; and ESPECIALLY to keep them from running amok in the neighbor's garden...which is (as you will well know if you've ever kept REAL goats yourself) their absolutely favorite activity of all, but doesn't really do much to improve relations with the neighbors. And even though you're doing it for their own good, even goats generally resent being led on a leash back to the goatshed, when they could be running free.

But getting back to the subject at hand, I understand perfectly well the importance of expressing a positive attitude and creating a positive message: that you “catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar,” and how important it is to give basically good people a good reputation to live up to. I know that internal motivation is a more powerful incentive than external pressure, and that it is better to inspire than to scold. What I DON’T really understand is why I find it so difficult at times to inspire myself, and why I have come to expect so little, and yet so much, from this “divine profession” to which I have devoted my entire adult life.

In Praise of Dyslexia

2007-12-18T10:01:00.000-05:00

A soon-to-be-published study by Cass Business School professor Julie Logan reports that 35% of successful American entrepeneurs exhibit signs of dyslexia. "The broader implication" according to the article, "is that many of the coping skills dyslexics learn in their formative years become best practices for the successful entrepreneur. Children who chronically fail standardized tests must become comfortable with failure. Slow readers learn to extract only vital information, so that they're constantly getting right to the point. Dyslexics are also forced to trust and rely on others to get things done -- an essential skill for anyone working to build a business."

If true, this is a fascinating illustration of the concept of "different abilities," as well as the notion that many so-called "disorders" are socially constructed (which is to say, that society finds certain behaviors disorderly, rather than there being anything inherently wrong with the person).

Of course, this also reminds me of all the speculation early in his administration that our President is dyslexic, which explains both his mother's interest in literacy, and his own routine butchering of the English language.

Then again, he could just be stupid. I also seem to recall him saying that the underlying problem with the French economy is that they don't even have a word for "entrepeneur."

But I think the main lesson I take away from all this is the distinction between intrinsic ability and hard work. Sure it's nice to be gifted and talented, or to possess "natural" abilities of above-average whatever. But it's persistence and hard work that always seem to make the real difference between success and failure. No matter how smart you are, there is always someone smarter...and everyone you meet knows something that you don't.

It doesn't matter how big or strong or fast or even beautiful you may be either...there is always someone bigger, and stronger, faster and more beautiful.

And luck? Everyone knows that hard workers make their own luck.

Here's another interesting article from Scientific American about the Secret to Raising Smart Kids. Guess what the secret is? Don't tell them they're smart. Tell them that effort is more important than ability, and to find confidence in their ability to weather failure rather than easily achieve success.

So next time you're feeling down and discouraged, take strength from your disappointment and remember that anything worth doing is worth doing badly...at first. But if you just stick with it, things will indeed get better. And so will you.

Auto-blog II -- My New Focus

2007-12-13T14:13:00.000-05:00

I notice with some amusement that my colleague from Portland OR, Marilyn Sewell, is also blogging about her new car, after her faithful old Honda was first stolen out of her driveway, and then missing for a month (during which time she replaced it with a used Volvo), only to later have the Honda recovered by the police. By that time, of course, the Honda had been stripped of anything valuable (which did not, apparently, include her CDs), and Marilyn had fallen head over heels in love with her new Swedish ride anyway, so the Japanese import was released into the custody of the Insurance company, who will no doubt find it a good home.

My story isn't nearly so dramatic as Marilyn's. Having made the decision to replace my 10-year-old Ranger pick-up with a smaller, more fuel-efficient and city-friendly (i.e. easy to park) vehicle, rather than paying $2500 to have the four-wheel-drive repaired and the rest of the vehicle brought up to where it would pass inspection, I basically only considered three options: the Escape Hybrid (because someone told me that I ought to buy a hybrid), the Subaru Outback wagon (which is a very popular car in my neighborhood, and also I've noticed among Unitarian ministers in general), and the Focus (which is the model Ford created to replace the Escort, and, as you have no doubt already inferred from the title, is the vehicle I eventually bought).

I'm not really certain how I became such a loyal Ford customer, but since this is my third one in a row now (and I've basicly driven nothing else for 15 years) I guess I qualify. Bought the original Escort wagon in part because we realized that we could buy two Escorts for the price of one Outback; and the fact that I drove it for nearly a quarter of a million miles before it finally gave up the ghost (in protest, I think, over having to leave its home in the Pacific Northwest) certainly did a lot to cement my loyalty to the product. The Ranger was not such a bad ride either, and my appreciation for that vehicle was reinforced early on by the fact that the only car dealership on Nantucket sold and serviced Fords, which pretty much gave them a Mircosoft-like competitive advantage when it came to selling to and servicing Island residents.

When I eventually moved back to "America," to an affluent little faux-rural New England town just over the river and through the woods from Walden Pond, my dirty, dented, decade-old pick-up made a nice contrast to the Escapes, Priuses, Saubs, Subarus, and BMWs I generally saw all around me...not to mention all the various SUVs and Mini-vans (of every make and model) and more Hummers per captia than anywhere else in the Commonwealth (although none, I don't think, were owned my members of the congregation). And since it was a fifteen minute drive in any direction just to get gas or groceries, I ended up spending a lot more time in that car than I would have chosen to otherwise.

But here in Portland ME it's a very different landscape. Although I live a half-mile from church (as opposed to only 40 yards in Carlisle, and maybe 40 feet on Nantucket), just about everything I could ever want or need is within easy walking distance of my apartment, and public transportation is readily available. Still, as a minister, I feel compelled to keep a car in the city, even though on some levels at least I would be delighted not to have to. My Aunt in Seattle has lived without a car in that city ever since she returned from the Peace Corps in the mid-1960's -- 40 years during which she has also traveled all over the world (including India and Pakistan, South America, and widely in Europe and Africa)using only public transportation, a bicycle, and her own two feet. She doesn't even like to RIDE in cars if she can avoid it. And I admire her independence in doing so.

But it's different being a minister. Even when gasoline and rubber were being strictly rationed during the Second World War, clergy and physicians received priority status, since society recognized that they needed those resources in order to accomplish their jobs. Nowadays MDs rarely make housecalls, the status of ministers is somewhat less exhalted, and if anything our society is more car-dependent than ever. But the importance of "auto-mobility" to the work of ministry is essentially unchanged; we travel at odd and unpredictable hours, are often needed in a hurry, even more often need to be two places at the same time, and are even at times required to provide transportation for others who cannot transport themselves.

Yet at the same time, the style of automobile a minister selects suggests an awful lot about their theology, and needs to be undertaken with great discernment. If I'm going to be making my parish visits in a Mercedes, a BMW, or a Porsche...it had better be AT LEAST a decade old, and preferably a vehicle that actually belongs to (or perhaps was bought by and handed down from) my extremely successful attorney/physician/corporate executive partner. Foreign compacts (like the Subaru or Marilyn's Honda) are generally good, while American cars (it seems to me, at least) are a little more of a mixed bag -- it's nice to buy domestic and support the jobs of unionized American Auto Workers, but is what's good for General Motors REALLY what's good for the country anymore?

Likewise, my heart may long for a little red convertible, but my brain tells me I'm a lot better off picking a sensible blue or green or white or gray sedan or compact wagon. Or maybe a small SUV or Mini-van...expecially if I have young children in the household. And if I REALLY want to make a statement, then I'll get a hybrid...assuming I can afford it. But God forbid that I should ever find myself behind the wheel of a Hummer...unless I'm accompanying a National Guard unit to the location of a natural disaster.

And so it came to pass that armed with this set of sensibilities, I set out in search of a new car to replace the Ranger. Ruled out the Hybrid Escape on grounds of cost, as well as the realization that both the Subaru and the Focus got just as good gas mileage with conventional technology. Flirted with the Subaru...and if I'd been willing to make the effort I probably could have found a good, low-mileage used Subaru wagon for only a few thousand more than I ended up paying for my Ford. But people who own these wagons tend to like them so well that they hold on to them for a long time, and besides, the Ford dealership is a lot closer to my home, and I already had a good relationship with them based on the work they'd already done on my truck. So that's where I started, and that's where I ended up...mostly because I didn't want to have to put any more time into this entire process than I absolutely had to anyway.

So I zeroed in on a Focus, and then began the even more complicated process of finding MY particular Focus out of all the possible Foci (or maybe in this case, it really is "Focuses") potentially available to me. And the reason this turned out to be more complicated than I'd thought is because I made it so. My first thought was that I would go with some sort of used "program" car -- a former rental a year or two old, which can generally be picked up for about two-thirds the price of a comparable new car. But those cars all come with automatic transmissions, and I'd decided that I really did want a standard five speed manual shift again, as well as cruise control if I could get it (since I'd also enjoyed that option on my previous two Fords, and have grown rather accustomed to it). And then (and this really was my one true concession to having turned fifty) I really wanted to have a moonroof if they could find one, just so I could still potentially open up the top and feel the wind blow through what's left of my hair on a sunny summer day once in awhile. But to compensate for that indulgence, I also insisted that there be no spoilers or flashy trim, and that the car could be any color but red.

The bad news was that there was only one vehicle with that particular configuration of equipment anywhere in New England. The good news was that it belonged to the dealership only five miles across town. Then we learned that it wouldn't arrive on the lot for another week. Then came the blizzard, which delayed things even more. By this time I was already starting to rethink my decision about buying a new car at all -- $2500 bucks to keep the Ranger on the road through another winter was looking like a pretty good idea after all. But my dad, bless his heart, came through with some very sensible fatherly advice: you tend to keep these cars a long time Tim, (he told me), and you can afford to buy the car you want -- so bite the bullet, spend the money, get the car and ENJOY IT! for a long, long time.

So that's what I did. Even so, after fifteen years without a car payment, the sticker shock was pretty intense. Doubled the cost of my insurance, and the state excise tax alone is a dollar a day. Add in the payments and the cost of off-street parking, and I'm into this alligator nearly five hundred dollars a month before I've bought a single drop of three dollar a gallon gasoline. All told, I'm estimating that the "privilege" of owning and operating my own vehicle is going to cost me about 12% of my annual gross income. Thats a helluva lot of cab rides, frankly. And if I lived in a community where flex-cars were available, I think I'd be looking awfully hard at signing up.

But then there's the clergy thing. Suburban nursing homes, evening potlucks and circle suppers, hospital visits, ministers meetings...a car may not be an absolute necessity, but it sure does make things easier and more convenient. Although let's not forget the greatest irony of all. Now that I've actually purchased this beautiful new car, I'm afraid to drive it in the snow...and so mostly I try to leave it parked in the garage, and walk everywhere I can anyway. So we'll see. Maybe by this time next year, somebody out there will get a great deal on a low-mileage, high MPG standard shift, cruise-control equipped Clerical Black Ford Focus sedan with a moonroof. Or maybe by then I will have simply gotten over all this automobile angst, and will be loving my new ride....

Auto-blog I - Remembrance of Rides Past

2007-12-10T10:00:00.000-05:00

So it finally happened. Rather than waiting for my '97 Ranger to take things into its own hands, last week I broke down and bought myself a new vehicle. This is actually the first new car I've owned in 15 years, and only the third I've owned in my entire lifetime of driving. And while I've started to give myself permission to feel happy about owning a new car (which is, after all, supposed to be a happy occasion), I'm also feeling a little funny about it...which is really what I want to write about.

But first a little history. My very first car was a hand-me-down 1962 red Plymouth Valiant station wagon (with a push-button automatic transmission)that had belonged to my mother for a dozen years before I finally got my hands on it. Picked up three tickets and was involved in three accidents with that little beauty, the last of which finally killed it outright on a sharp curve on a steep hill on a rainy day in a suburb of Seattle about two weeks before I started college at the University of Washington.

But by that time I already had another ride: an even redder 1968 Triumph TR-250 convertible which my father had bought for me as a reward/bribe in order to get me to study a little harder so that I could get into a decent college in the first place. It's funny how quickly a basically bright but lazy kid can become a straight-A student when there's a sports car as incentive, and although my father complained miserably about that little two-seater roadster, I suspect in retrospect he would say it was the best $2,000 he's ever spent in his life.

And it did double duty; because once I actually started college my younger brother got to drive the TR, and I didn't get back behind the wheel until the start of my Junior year, when HE was a freshman living in the next dorm over, and I could finally afford to insure the thing myself. But of course he kept a duplicate set of keys, and more than once I stopped by my parking space only to discover nothing but an oilspot waiting for me. But at least he always had the decency to return it with a full tank of gas!

When I went off to HDS for graduate school (at the start of his Junior year), the TR once more came into my brother's keeping, and eventually passed from our lives on his watch. I lived quite contentedly carless in Cambridge and Boston, and remained car-free until the start of my internship back in Seattle, where I spent $300 for a 1974 lemon yellow Volkswagen Dasher. That car burned about a quart of oil for every tank of gas, but it got me everywhere I needed to go for a year an a half, before finally perishing in a snowstorm 10 days before I was scheduled to begin my first settled ministry in Midland, Texas.

It was in Midland that I purchased my first-ever new car: a 1985 Toyota Corolla. Of course, being from the Pacific Northwest, I didn't really appreciate how few and far between Toyotas were in Texas in those days; my "new" Toyota was actually delivered to me from a dealership in New Orleans, with 800 miles already on the odometer. I didn't care; I drove that car for eight years (including back and forth between Texas and Seattle three times), while my wife went through four different vehicles in that same period (a used GMC Hornet-which was her vehicle of choice before we were married; a new Ford Escort; a new Dodge Omni; and a slightly-used Dodge Shadow, which she came home with one day after taking the Omni to the dealership to have a headlight replaced, and discovering that she could actually save nearly $100/month if she simply traded it in and bought the Shadow instead).

In 1993 my wife had just finished Law School, and I was about to start back to school myself to study for a PhD. She had a good job, we had come into some money, and so we paid cash and treated ourselves to his and hers Ford Escorts: a little red coupe for her, and a forest green wagon for me. I put 237k miles on that car in the eight years I drove it, commuting back and forth between Portland, Corvallis, and Eugene...as well as all up and down the I-5 corridor from Bellingham to Roseburg preaching on the weekends (just for the record, in that same eight-year period she only put 42k miles on the coupe).

In the summer of 2001, I'd completed my PhD and was about to begin an interim ministry on Nantucket Island. What to do about a car on the island was a frequent topic of discussion among my family. At first I thought I might be able to get by without a car, but I was assured that this would not be the case -- that even on an island, a minister still needs to be able to make those parish visits out to 'Sconset; and in winter there are no buses and bicycles are a little problematic. Then I thought I might swap cars with my daughter, who was then living in Massachusetts but planning to return to Oregon in the fall. But she refused to take the Escort under any circumstances. Finally, when the folks on Nantucket also assured me that the island was an excellent place to have an old car (since when it DOES finally break down, you don't have that far to walk home), I decided to try my luck and try to drive my trusty wagon cross-country.

In retrospect, having lived so much of my life behind the wheel of that vehicle for the previous eight years, I had a lot of emotional investment in getting my CLERIC car to a nice round quarter of a million miles before allowing her to retire gracefully on Nantucket. Meanwhile, my family started a pool about how far backwards along the Oregon Trail I would make it before the car finally expired permanently. The winning bet was that I would never make it out of the state; climbing the Blue Mountains on I-84 I suddenly lost 5th gear, and so I coasted down into Baker City and within four hours had traded in my Escort for a used, 1997 white Ford Ranger X-cab 4x4 pickup.

Unpacked the Escort, repacked the Ranger, settled the dog safely into the passenger seat, and we were back on the road again. Drove that truck for two years on the Island, and another four in Carlisle...and learned to love the four-wheel drive and the big cargo space, but never really did get used to the poor gas mileage (19 mpg), or how tricky it was to park in tight places. Big blind spot too, especially trying to glance back over my right shoulder through both a tinted rear window and the canopy. Put a big dent in the passenger door my first day on the Island, trying to squeeze into my driveway past an inconveniently-located telephone pole; and over the years picked up a few more dents and dings as well...but for some reason it didn't really bother me, because, after all, isn't that what trucks are for?

That Ranger also came in awfully useful moving up here to Portland, and I'm sure I could have happily driven it for many more years, since it only had 134k miles on it and still seemed to be going strong. But I also noticed last winter that it was making funny noises when I put it into four-wheel drive, so last month when I took it into the dealership to have it serviced and winterized, I asked them to take a look. Sure enough, I needed new hubs and a U-joint, plus brake work, a new thermostat, as well as an aftermarket brakelight kit to bring the canopy into confomity with Maine law...$2500 worth of work (which the service manager quickly offered to discount 10% on account of me being clergy).

And I was almost ready to get that work done, when while driving back down to Massachusetts on the day after Thanksgiving I suddenly remembered that burnt-out headlight on the Dodge Omni. Why, I asked, should I sink another $2500 into a beat-up ten-year-old gas-guzzling clunker when I could be driving a new, compact, fuel-efficient 21st-century automobile instead? It just didn't make sense to me. Or perhaps I should say, all of a sudden I just didn't feel like nursing along my old truck from one mechanical crisis to the next, and started looking forward to owning something with a standard 3 year/36k mile bumper to bumper warranty, free road side assistance, passenger-side airbags, and all the rest.

And so the search began. To be continued in part two....

I Just Can't Weight!

2007-12-09T06:32:00.000-05:00

Over at Beauty Tips for Ministers, my buddy PeaceBang is launching an "On-Line Ministry Posse" for "Ordained Compulsive Overeaters." I'm no doubt eligible for a charter membership, but having just glanced at the Harvard study about the social contagiousness of obesity, what I'm really wondering is whether I could do more good simply by placing myself in quarantine instead. Like PB, I also weight about a hundred pounds more than I did when I graduated from seminary, although in fairness, after three years of living on coffee, cigarettes, Top Ramen, tunafish, and contemplative prayer, I looked an awful lot like an internment camp survivor on the day of my ordination.

A little home-cooking and a more family-friendly lifestyle quickly cured that. Then came the occupational hazards of our vocation: wedding receptions, covered-dish dinners, coffee hour, tea and cookies during pastoral visits, not to mention the countless bags of food handed to me through drive-up windows as I rushed from one place to another. They quickly started to take their toll -- an extra 300 calories a week comes to about five pounds a year, which over the course of a 25 year ministry...well, you do the math. It's not enough just to hang a "Please Don't Feed the Minister" sign around one's neck. Frankly, I'm astonished that I'm not a lot heavier than I am!

Of course, I could always simply tell myself that being a "weighty soul" merely gives me more gravitas. But I also worry about the health risks of having a BMI over 30: diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke (not to mention all of the day to day aches and pains of simply moving around in the world)...not exactly the kind of "live fast, die young, leave a good looking corpse" death-style I'd envisioned for myself as a kid. The truth is, I've never really seen myself as "heavy" (despite my constant joking about my weight); in my mind's eye I'm still that svelte, limber, well-muscled twenty-something with a full head of hair who could play full court basketball all afternoon, shower, down a whole pizza and a pitcher of beer, and still do it three times before sleeping the sleep of the just after. And I suspect like a lot of us who saunter in these circles, I know a lot more about HOW to lose weight than I actually seem to be able to bring myself to DO. But for what it's worth, here are a dozen tips for dropping the lbs. Maybe if I write them out like this, I might actually feel inspired to practice what I preach.

1) Eat Positively, not negatively. I'm now trying to organize my eating around foods that I like and that are good for me, rather than merely what's fast, tasty, and convenient. Healthy eating is a lifestyle choice: slow food, "locovore," vegan or semi-veg, or even just a few "fast" days to go with the feast days. I want to think of it as a cuisine rather than a diet. And even more importantly, as something I enjoy rather than a source of depravation.

2) Eat a big, healthy breakfast. I'm not talking steak and eggs here folks. I mean things like oatmeal and granola, yogurt, fresh fruit, maybe ONE boiled free-range, high-Omega 3 egg. And for God's sake stay away from Starbucks or the Dunkin' Donuts! That's not breakfast; it's dessert.

3) Eat your main meal at mid-day. And eat whatever you want, within reason. If you're already following Principle #1, this should be no sweat. My nutritionist had a great rule of thumb: 1/2 the plate with vegetables, 1/4 protein, 1/4 starch. And then pay attention to the size of the plate!

4)TWO Apples a day... My nutritionist also taught me that if I planned eating around four servings of fruits and vegetable first, it makes it a lot easier to control the fats and starches. Of course, it also helps to know that one good-sized apple is TWO servings of fruit....

5) Watch what you drink. One of the most astonishing things I discovered when I first started keeping track of everything I ate was how many calories were in my beverages: fancy coffees, sodas, beer and wine, even fruit juice. Now I'm trying to keep it to black coffee, herbal tea, and plain old H2O...with maybe an occasional glass of beer or wine (as it says in scripture - 1 Tim 5:23) just to help with the digestion. I've even forsworn diet sodas, which some studies show despite their zero calorie reputation simply stimulate the appetite for other sweets. My experience was that even when I was having a hard time watching what I ate, it was relatively easy to cut back on what I drank. So put the water bottles in the fridge where the diet cokes used to be, and if you still need a little caffeine pick-me-up in the middle of the afternoon, try a good iced coffee instead.

6) No noshing after dark. This is a hard one for me...which became a lot easier when I also made the decision to stop watching TV. Of course, I wasn't able to stick to that resolution for very long either. But at least now I try to keep my pantry clear of foods beginning with "C" - cake, cookies, candy, crackers, chips, Cokes...you get the picture. And thanks to TiVo, I can watch a little of whatever I want when I get home from church, and still get to bed at a reasonable hour.

7) Shop one day at a time. This is a little more eccentric, since ideally what one would do is shop once a week with meal plans and a list, and put nothing else in the cart, and eat only what you'd planned. But since I don't have that kind of foresight or self-control, I've gone to the other extreme of trying to keep very little food around the house and food shopping every day, just like the French. It's too soon to tell how it's going to work out. But if for some reason I don't get to the store, I still have a pantry full of Top Ramen and canned tunafish!

8) Get out of the car. This is kind of ironic for me, since after six years of driving a beat-up old pickup, I finally broke down and bought a new vehicle...the first truly NEW vehicle I've owned in 15 years. And that in itself is worth its own blog entry, but the bottom line is that now that I own a new car, I don't like to drive it in the snow, so instead I tend to keep it safely parked in the garage and try to walk everywhere I can (including the small grocery store just up the block). Behind America's sedentary lifestyle and national obesity epidemic is a "trinity" of demons: TV, the automobile, and high-fructose corn syrup. Just think how much better we all would be if we could just exorcize those three things from our lives.

9) Lift weights to lose weight. OK, I admit it -- I come from a family of three boys, and sports were always a big part of our lives. But as much as I love the gym, I've always hated the weight room -- because lifting weights is WORK, not play. But the fact of the matter is, pumping a little iron does a lot of good things for a body: builds muscle, burns fat, shapes and tones...it's really miraculous. So join a gym, find a partner or hire a trainer, and just do it! As unpleasant as it can be, minute by minute and pound for pound, it's a helluva lot better than the treadmill....

10) Pay cash when dining out. OK, maybe this is a little extreme. But living all alone right in the heart of a small city known for its great restaurants, I tend to eat out a lot. And for some inexplicable reason, I always tend to eat a little less (and a little less often) when I know I'm paying cash....

11) Never clean your plate. I know, it goes against everything my mother taught me. But clergy tend to have a lot on their plates, and people keep bringing us heaping second helpings. So just make it a rule to leave those last few bites for Jesus, who God knows was a scrawny little guy who could have used a little fattening up. This works metaphorically as well as nutritionally, BTW.

12) Always talk to strangers. Do you remember your mother also telling you not to talk with your mouth full? Well, here's a thought -- talk first, and eat between ideas rather than talking between bites. Have you ever noticed how chatty Cathy always seems to send half her meal back to the kitchen, while the strong, silent types (like me) are nibbling off their plate, and nodding while we chew? It's just an observation...

And here's a final thought, to make it an even Bakers Dozen. Don't try to swallow all these things at once; they'll just make you sick to your stomach. Rather, pick one or two and nibble on them for awhile, and then add a third, and a fourth...and keep going from there. I know I put this weight on one bite at a time, over a period of 20 years. It's going to have to come off the same way...although hopefully, a little faster....

Justice Making

2007-12-05T14:11:00.000-05:00

Now that I've come out of blogospheric hybernation, I suppose I ought to catch up with a few other loose ends. A few months ago I attended a day-long training session with Marie Fortune around the issue of working pastorally with survivors of domestic abuse. As part of that training, she spelled out a seven-step process (or perhaps paradigm is a better word) for Justice Making, which I thought was extremely insightful and relevant to a much broader set of situations and circumstances. So while it's still relatively fresh in my mind, I thought I'd flesh it out a bit and share it here.

* Truth-Telling -- Justice-Making begins by creating a safe space where people can tell the truth about their experience. Perpetrators depend upon the silence of their victims in order to hide their behavior from the scrutiny of others. Creating opportunities for people to find their voice again, and to offer their testimony, is the first step from victimization to survival.

* Acknowledgement -- Once people have found the courage to tell their truth, it is also essential that we listen to them, hear what they have to say, and acknowledge that what happened to them wasn't right or fair. Victims typically blame themselves for their misfortunes; survivors are able to distinguish between the things they had control over and the things they didn't, and need to be affirmed in their understanding that they are still OK even though what happened to them wasn't.

* A Compassionate Response -- Often the temptation when we hear a story of injustice is to want to "fix it" -- to become angry, to want to do something, to forget about the person while we focus on the problem. But the person should always come first. Compassion means literally "to suffer with." The Compassionate Response to injustice is basically that same old "ministry of presence" we were taught about in CPE: a person-to-person connection that lifts up our common humanity and holds it in relationship regardless of what may have been suffered.

* Protect the Vulnerable -- Safety for victims and potential victims is the sine qua non of authentic justice making. If injustice can not be "arrested," then attempting to establish justice in an atmosphere of uncertainty, insecurity and vulnerability becomes very difficult indeed.

* Accountability for Perpetrators -- In its essence, the call for accountability is an invitation to repentence. It asks (and insists) that the perpetrator(s) of an injustice recognize that their actions and choices do not take place in a consequence-free environment, and that they take responsibility for the consequences of their own behavior. To frame this in a religious context, without repentence their can be no atonement, and without atonement there can be no forgiveness.

* Restitution -- Domestic abuse, like any other abuse of power, is ultimately about broken covenants, the violation of boundaries, and damaged relationships. Religious professionals in particular often have a bias for attempting to repair those relationships prematurely, before first attending to the more fundamental issues of safety and accountability. Likewise, often times these relationships are broken beyond repair, at which point the work of ministry becomes one of shared grieving rather than attempted healing.

* Vindication -- OK, so maybe it does have the same root as "vindictive," but vindication is not about revenge; nor is it reconciliation, forgiveness, or even atonement. Rather, it's about being liberated from the burden of something that was not your responsibility in the first place. Or to put it another way, it is the public recognition of an injustice rather than the "acceptance" of one, which in turn releases the victim from those insidious feelings of shame and guilt regarding their own victimization, and sets them solidly on the path to healing, wholeness, and "survivorhood." It is the public affirmation of a private truth, which "justifies" the survivor and sets them free.

Right or Liked?

2007-12-03T10:00:00.000-05:00

First snowstorm of the season last night. Forecast was for nine inches, but so far we've been disappointed in that regard. Not that I really consider it much of a disappointment. Good numbers in church yesterday for the first Sunday in Advent; nearly 200 souls (children and adults) at worship, and over 40 for the "Newcomers Luncheon" after church, where we introduced some of the church officers and talked about the next steps in the Path to Membership. Lots of energy and enthusiasm for the start of the holidays. Makes it a pleasure to get up and come into work in the morning, even when it's snowing.

Not that I harbor any illusions that anyone had actually noticed, but until Linda Laskowski discovered (and resurrected) an old post I'd written last summer describing her "Congregations Count" workshop at General Assembly, it had been several months since I'd last posted here. Part of the reason for my absence has simply been the distractions of other, more important concerns as I begin my new ministry here in Portland ME. But mostly it involved some serious soul-searching, after I violated the integrity of one of my oldest and most fundamental principles as a writer, and pulled down an earlier post about my transition experience out of the congregation I was serving before being called here, as a result of having received an angry (and, the truth be told, somewhat threatening) e-mail from one of my former parishioners, berating me for having publicly "denigrated" in this blog both that congregation and (more accurately) the affluent and privileged community where it is located.

Frankly, I didn't really see it that way myself. From my point of view, the post was honest, candid, and (to be sure) at times less than completely flattering...but it also acknowledged both some of my own shortcomings in that situation (since there's no way I could possibly have listed them all), as well as many of the positive things I learned from and enjoyed about the experience.

But since I'm not in the business of gratuitiously pissing people off (or at least I don't THINK I am), I decided to pull down that previous post anyway, at least for awhile, while I thought things through, and sorted out my own feelings and opinions on the matter. After all, from my perspective, the real "soul work" took place in the writing itself. The sharing of my thoughts on this blog was only an afterthought, so that others might potentially benefit from the wisdom of my experience. Even so, I also really hated the idea of censoring myself simply because someone else took offense at my honest opinions. It's called a "heckler's veto," and it really pisses me off -- especially when used as a weapon by powerful people who desire to silence their critics.

And the great irony, of course, is that the principal barrier to that congregation ever achieving everything it has the potential to become is its own inability (or maybe unwillingness) to see itself as it truly is (which is what made my experience there so frustrating to begin with). Which is also, of course, now entirely their problem, and no longer any real concern of mine. In fact, until I received that angry and intimidating e-mail, I felt like I had pretty much achieved closure with that situation, along with all the attendant disappointment that accompanied it, and was moving on to something far more congenial and satisfying. But afterwards, for awhile at least, I suddenly found it difficult to think about anything else!

So thanks for that little gift, former parishioner. If you were afraid that I was going to tell the truth about your smug, sanctimonious little "City in the Woods," maybe you should have treated me a little better when you had the chance.

At the end of the day, the Truth (or at least MY truth) is that, notwithstanding my former congregation's routine and habitual institutional parsimony, I actually liked (and still like) the people there quite a bit -- even the ones who sometimes made my life difficult or challenging (and believe me, UUs are very clever and intelligent folk, and can often be quite creative in this regard). But it's also true that when, after four years without a raise (or even a COLA), I finally started to complain, rather than addressing the situation responsibly, the treasurer's husband (who also, surprise, surprise, just so happens to be the same former parishioner who wrote me the nasty e-mail) took me to lunch and strongly suggested that I might actually be a lot happier working somewhere else. Which, of course, turned out to be true. Which is why I feel so grateful now that things worked out the way they did, and so delighted have been called to this pulpit here in Portland.

UU clergy are often charged to "preach the truth to power." This, or something like it, is pretty standard language in most ordination and installation services, and a responsibility which I have always tried to take to heart in my own ministry. At my installation service at that former congregation I pledged myself "with God's help, worthily to maintain the freedom of this pulpit, speaking the truth in love both publicly and privately." And yet one wonders, what does it mean to speak "with love?" Does it mean telling lies or keeping secrets, in order to prevent someone else's embarrasment or disgrace? Or is it actually more loving to tell the truth honestly yet without joy, knowing that the danger of keeping secrets is always worse that the truth plainly spoken?

Unfortunately, the challenge often gets reduced simply to a more rudimentary conflict between personal intellectual integrity and interpersonal social graces: Would your rather be Right or Liked? But this is really way too simplistic. Most folks, I think, would like to be both right AND liked. The real problem is that a lot of folks simply don't like to hear the ugly truth. And so to avoid being unpopular, we refrain from sharing it with them. Yet ultimately, the issue of "being right" has nothing to do with one's own ego-driven needs to be liked, or even the natural human desire to avoid appearing foolish (as in "I'm right and you're wrong"). Rather, it is sustained by the underlying and uncompromising conviction that Truth Really Matters, and that we should seek it even at the price of both being unpopular and at times discovering (and admitting) that we were wrong.

The REAL ethical dilemma for me always boils down to the whole Prophetic/Socratic/Cassandra issue: how long should one remain silent about something they KNOW to be wrong, simply to avoid becoming unpopular and disliked?

The word "courtesy" originally refered to a style of manners appropriate to the royal court, where it was often difficult to speak the truth to power without having one's head chopped off. Because let's face it, powerful people typically don't like hearing the unvarnished truth (much less being made to appear foolish or told they are wrong) any more than the rest of us do. Which is why it is so easy for them to grow ignorant and out of touch with the factual situation "on the ground" and "outside the bubble." When we habitually replace candor with euphemism, and...well, I don't really need to spell it all out, do I? Or maybe I do. After all, these days our leaders often aren't exactly the brightest bulbs on the marquee....

"Say what you mean. Mean what you say. Try not to BE mean when you say it." Clarity. Sincerity. Sensitivity. This is the challenge we clergy face when we lovingly attempt to speak the truth to people who have power over us. We need to embrace the values of honesty and candor, while at the same time trying as best we can to take our own egos out of the equation, and make ourselves servants of Truth itself. But keeping secrets simply to spare someone the shame of their own bad behavior is, at best, an act of co-dependent enabling, and at worst bad behavior in its own right. To put it another way, "All that is required for Evil to triumph is for Good to remain silent and do nothing." I think it was Winston Churchill who said that. Or something like it anyway.

Then there remains the delicate question of being sensitive to other people's feelings, even when you know they're wrong....

The Truth often hurts enough simply on its own. There's rarely any need to rub it in by saying "I told you so." Defensiveness and denial are difficult enough barriers to hearing and understanding Truth; we don't need to make it any worse by getting our own egos involved. By embracing an attitude of empathy and compassion, our desire to be liked, along with our willingness to care for others (whether they "agree" with us or not), can help to make "the Truth plainly spoken" a little easier to hear as well.

I calculate that my four-year sojourn with my former congregation easily cost me over $100,000 in direct compensation. And if that sounds like an awful lot of money to you, it's because it is. Of course, 80% of that was simply the difference between the low-ball offer I agreed to accept from them, and the six-figure salary I turned down at the time from another, larger congregation just down the road. Another $19k had to do with the way they chose to handle the utilities at the Parsonage: basically neglecting to inform me beforehand that they were not included in the "Fair Rental Value" they had provided in their Congregational Record, and then deducting that money from my paycheck instead. Finally there's the four years without a raise or a COLA, and the nearly six grand they decided to stiff me by refusing to pay me through the entire three months of the contractual 90 day severence period. Oh yes, and they'd also promised me equity sharing and a sabbatical after five years service (as per the Guidelines), and of course I never heard anything more about that either. But you know, as my daddy used to tell me, we pay a little tuition for every lesson that we learn. And since we generally can't afford to make ALL the mistakes ourselves, it's a blessing sometimes to be able to learn from the mistakes of others.

As for my former congregation, the truth be told, I'm honestly hoping that they will thrive under new ministerial leadership. I hope that their big anniversary celebration this year goes well, I hope that the cellular tower contracts we'd been pursuing for the past two years are at last approved by the foot-dragging town government (contributing some much-needed additional revenue to the bottom line), and I also hope that they will finally figure out that if they want to keep their next pastor happy, they need to be attentive and faithful to the UUA's Fair Compensation Guidelines, and increase their average pledge above its currently shameful level in order to make that happen. And if they can just do those few simple things, they might actually have a chance of becoming the kind of congregation they think they are, rather than continually building "castles in the air" without bothering to put the foundations under them.

Now, about that hundred thousand dollars.... Maybe once those cell phone dollars start rolling in, we could just split the difference?

Is Unitarian Universalism a Religion? [short and to the point]

2007-11-30T09:55:00.000-05:00

Over at another blog-site, Dr Rieux asks:
Is Unitarian Universalism a Religion? [warning; long!] Tried to post a comment there, but found the registration process so tedious that I decided to post here and link instead.

Not to make light of everything that has been written here, but you are really asking all the wrong questions. Notwithstanding Sinkford's loose-lipped efforts to keep reverence afloat, and the rather depressing fact that "Unitarian-Universalism" is now a registered trademark, it seems to me that what really matters is figuring out whether "Our Liberal Movement in Theology" is best understood as:

1) An historically liberal Protestant Christian denomination and successor organization to two other historically liberal Protestant Christian denominations;

2) A post-Christian Protestant heresy open to the wisdom and inspiration of all the world's great religious traditions;

3) Its own "New Religion," with rather grandiose aspirations of eventually supplanting all of the world's more traditional religions;

4) Secularism in "religious clothing"...or as someone once put it (maybe me), "the Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party at...if not prayer, then some superficial imitation of same."

I'm not going to weigh in with my opinion (if it isn't obvious already which way my sentiments run), mostly because I think the REAL answer is "all of the above." But I'm not so sure that's the BEST answer. And that's what really concerns me about the future of our so-called "living" faith/religious tradition....

Coming this XMAS to an XBOX near you

2007-11-23T04:05:00.000-05:00

Compliments of the US Army, and Redstorm Entertainment. www.truesoldiersgame.com

Congregations Count (Part Two)

2007-11-12T09:28:00.001-05:00

Inspired by Linda Laskowski's discovery and comment on my earlier post summarizing her excellent GA workshop last summer, here are a few of the tools we've developed here at First Parish to assist us in our Membership Outreach process.

VISITORS LETTER: [this goes out from me personally to every first-time visitor to First Parish within 48 hours of their visit, and always concludes with a handwritten postscript. I'm not entirely satisfied with the letter itself (even though I wrote it); the tone has a little too much "sizzle," and not quite enough specific information for my taste. But since we are still evolving our other processes around Newcomers Conversations, the New UU Class and the like, it wasn't possible to be any more specific]

Name
Address
City State Zip

Dear Name:

Welcome to the First Parish in Portland! I’m so pleased that you decided to worship with us Sunday, and hope that you will find here the kind of active, liberal, free-thinking faith community you’ve been searching for. As minister of this congregation, I’m especially interested in seeing to it that your experience here is a warm and welcoming one, as you decide in your own way and at your own speed whether or not First Parish is for you. Many of us looked long and hard before we found a place we could comfortably call our spiritual home. Perhaps at First Parish, you will discover yours as well.

Some people think of a church merely as a building: a physical structure of granite and mortar, glass and plaster, standing tall in the center of the city as a visible landmark in the landscape of the larger community.

Others think of church principally as a religious institution: an organization with principles and purposes, policies and by-laws, and charged with the mission of doing God’s work in the world.

Theologians sometimes speak of “the Church” as a mystical body of believers: a spiritual community of faith, memory and hope, which transcends the boundaries of time or space.

But when I think of church, I think of people. Real people, like you and me, who inhabit the building, who embody the spirit, who are profoundly committed to doing God’s good works with their own two hands.

The First Parish in Portland is a spiritual community of real people walking together in covenantal relationship one with another, and devoted to important values and principles larger than ourselves. It takes each and every one of us working side by side to make our faith community everything it should be. If your experience of organized religion in the past hasn’t quite lived up to your expectations, I invite you to join with us in creating something worthy of your hopes and dreams and aspirations. It may well be that the only thing missing from this CH_RCH is U.

Faithfully Yours,

Tim W. Jensen, Parish Minister

***
[PATHWAY TO MEMBERSHIP - this is the "roadmap" which our Membership committee is using to help track, guide, and support newcomers through their journey to formal membership in our congregation]

The Path to Membership at First Parish

OVERVIEW: Often when churches begin discussing ways to “grow” their membership, they allow themselves to be distracted by the numbers, and forget that numbers are merely a marker for measuring how successfully we are performing our core mission, which is transforming people’s lives for the better.

Perhaps a better way to think of growth is as an expression of our “ministry of hospitality.” Our church is like a feast, a banquet, a party to which everyone is invited, and it’s our responsibility as hosts to make certain that everybody feels safe and welcome, and that they are getting fed, meeting the other guests, can find what they need, and are basically having a good time.

Research shows that first-time visitors to a church typically follow a predictable “path” to eventual membership, and that growing churches tend to be aware of that path, and take steps to help newcomers move along it smoothly as they decide for themselves whether or not a participation in the life and community of a particular congregation is going to be part of their own spiritual journey. The world may well beat a path to our door in search of a better mousetrap, but it helps if there are at least signposts pointing the way, so that they don’t accidentally become lost in the woods.

Step One: Attraction (Invitation & Recruitment) - “Come on in, the water’s fine!”

• This is typically the most difficult element to control, and the most expensive to influence significantly. But there are a variety of ways in which we can work to raise our profile and enhance our reputation in the wider community, and this goal should be pursued in an intentional manner.

• Our central location is also a valuable asset that contributes significantly to our public visibility. Small things like the Wayside Pulpit and our Reader Board can do a lot to attract people’s attention and invite them through the front door.

• Our Website is likewise a very important vehicle for encouraging “seekers” to visit our church in person. A “FAQ for Visitors” is being developed, and will be added to our homepage as soon as it is ready.

• Far and away the most effective method for attracting newcomers to our church is “word of mouth” combined with a personal invitation from someone they know. Thus much of our work in “recruitment” is actually creating the kind of environment where people feel comfortable inviting their friends, and creating the kind of institutional culture where that sort of invitation becomes normal.

Step Two: First Impressions - “Getting Your Feet Wet”

• This is VERY IMPORTANT! Although First Parish feels like a second home to many of us, visiting an unfamiliar church for the first time can be a very intimidating experience. Likewise, most first-time visitors to a church make up their minds within five minutes whether or not they will return a second time.

• Visitors and Members alike are warmly welcomed by a Greeter from the Membership Committee as they arrive in the Vestibule. Current Members are reminded to wear their name tags; visitors are invited to make a nametag, and also to sign our guest register or fill out a visitors card at the Greeters Table. The Ushers continue to distribute Orders of Service and the Sunday Bulletin (which now contains information specifically of interest to newcomers) as they have in the past.

• Visitors are explicitly welcomed to our church by the Worship Leader, and invited to coffee hour following the service. In the coffee hour, a “Newcomers/Welcome Table” containing information about First Parish and Unitarian Universalism is staffed by representatives of the Membership Committee. “Gold Cup Greeters” circulate through the coffee hour, introducing themselves to people they don’t recognize (something as simple as “Hi! I don’t think we’ve met before”), and personally welcoming them to the church.

• Follow -up postcards from the Greeters-on-duty are addressed and sent that same day to each first-time visitor. The names of these visitors are also reported to the office for inclusion in our “Prospective New Members” database.

Step Three: Returning to Explore - “Wading Right In”

• In addition to the postcard, a Welcoming Letter from the Minister is sent to each first time visitor, once again welcoming them to the church and inviting them to participate as they choose in a variety of activities designed specifically for newcomers (see below).

• If the visitor has indicated specific areas of interest on their visitors card, these are followed up separately by the appropriate volunteer in charge of that activity.

• “Permanent” nametags are made for each visitor, in order that we might more easily track those who return for a second time, and also so that each second time visitor finds something “belonging” to them waiting for them if and when they return.

• Approximately one Sunday per month there is a “Welcoming Conversation with the Minister,” where Newcomers have an opportunity to ask their questions about UU & FP in a semi-structured environment.

• As needed, a three-session “New UU” class is offered for individuals who are specifically interested in becoming members of the church.

Step Four: Commitment - “Taking the Plunge” (formally becoming an “Official” Member of First Parish).

• Following completion of the New UU class, individuals are personally invited to become members of First Parish.

• Those who wish to become members sign the membership book, and are formally welcomed into Membership at a brief ceremony during the Sunday Morning worship service

• It’s important to recognize that the decision to become a member of a church is a very personal thing, and that some individuals will choose NOT to affiliate officially with the church, but will still participate actively in many of our programs and ministries. This is OK.

• SHORT CUT FOR “EXPERIENCED” UUs. Some individuals will arrive at First Parish already familiar with Unitarian Universalism, and perhaps having already been a member of another UU congregation. These individuals will be told that they are welcome to participate in the classes if they like, but may also simply join the church by privately signing the book after a conversation with the minister.

Step Five: Discipleship - “Going Deeper” (Making Your Membership Work for You)

• As part of their New Member orientation, each new member will be encouraged to find both some sort of program, activity, or “fellowship circle” which enhances their own spiritual life, and also to find some sort of volunteer opportunity which supports the larger mission and ministry of the church (see below). “One hand for the boat, and one hand for yourself.”

• It is important that a “catalog” of potential activities be visible and accessible to new members. Potential Fellowship Circles include participation in a covenant group or other Small Group Ministry, membership in the choir, enrollment in a life-long learning class, or participation in any one of the dozens of activities which take place here every year.

• The underlying goal here is not only to deepen and enrich the quality of each new member’s faith experience. We are also attempting to integrate them into our larger community in a meaningful and fulfilling way. A good benchmark for this process is the formula “Six friends in Six months.”

Step Six: Vocation - “Being Sent” by finding Meaningful Work that supports the larger Mission and Ministry of the Church.

• Often there is a great deal of overlap between “Going Deeper” and “Being Sent.” But it would be a mistake to assume that every committee is a “fellowship circle,” or that volunteer work alone is enough to deepen someone’s faith experience in a meaningful way

• At the same time, it is important that new members (and long time members as well) recognize that their contributions large or small are important and appreciated, and that they are (to continue the nautical metaphor) valued members of the crew and not just passengers along for the ride.

• A membership/volunteer coordinator should work with the nominating committee to try to find a meaningful job for every person in the church. It can be large or small, it should be self-selected if possible, it needs to contribute in a recognizable way to the work of the church as a whole, and it needs to be recognized and publicly acknowledged as well. Simply committing to attend services regularly (and, of course, to greet the people sitting around you and sing the hymns enthusiastically) qualifies as a “meaningful job,” provided it is done in a meaningful and committed way.

***
SO, WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? [this is a little brochure which we use as literature targeted specifically at return visitors, which basically outlines the Path to Membership from the perspective of someone who is on it.]

If you’re still relatively new to First Parish, and trying to figure out how best to navigate the currents and eddys of our shared congregational life, here are a few handy tips to help you get right into the swim of things!

Get Your Feet Wet. Keep attending Sunday Services, and be sure to make time afterwards to join us for conversation and refreshments in the Parish House parlour. Fill out a Visitors Card, so that you can begin receiving and reading our monthly newsletter, “Stone Soup.” Stop by the Welcome Table in the Parish House and talk with the friendly people there. Take home some of our literature, or Google “Unitarian Universalism” on the internet. Attend a “Conversation with the Minister” (generally held right after church on the first Sunday of each month), and ask the most challenging questions you can think of. We may not have all the answers, but at least we can try to point you in the right direction!

Wade Right In. Sign up for our “Explorer Series” of Orientation Classes (starting in January), or enroll in one of our many other Lifelong Learning offerings. Participate in a Faith in Action event. Try out for the Choir. Join a Covenant Group, or one of our other Small Group Ministries. Come to a potluck, or a Circle Supper. Sign up to be a greeter, an usher, a helper in the Sunday School. Light a candle during “Joys & Sorrows.” Or just keep sitting in your favorite seat there on the aisle near the back of the Meeting House week after week until folks start to think that the pew belongs to you. Do as much or as little as you like; it’s all up to you.

Take the Plunge! Formal membership in a faith community means different things to different people. But if you should decide that you want to “sign the book” and become an official member of the Congregational Society at First Parish, we would hope that you would at least feel comfortable with all or most of the following:

• Be familiar with the basic programs and activities at First Parish, and feel at home thinking and speaking of this church as “your” church.

• Within the natural constraints of your particular lifestyle and whatever other personal obligations you may have, attend Sunday Worship as regularly as you can.

• Appropriate to your personal situation and financial means, generously support the work and ministry of this congregation.

• Find and join some sort of “Fellowship Circle,” so that you might enrich your own spiritual journey by sharing it with others, and forming durable and significant relationships of mutual accountability and support. A Fellowship Circle might be a Covenant Group, or one of our other Small Group Ministries; it could be an on-going class, a regular social group, the Choir, or even a working committee. The main thing is that your Circle consist of people you know and trust and see on a regular basis, and with whom you feel comfortable sharing your thoughts and feelings about “matters of ultimate concern.”

• Identify some sort of job, task, role or responsibility that feeds your soul and which you can think of as your “ministry.” Remember the old sailing rule, “One hand for the boat; One hand for yourself” – we want you to feel like you are one of the crew, and not just a passenger along for the ride. The ministry you choose doesn’t have to be forever. In fact, we encourage you to change and grow your particular ministry as you yourself change and grow.

• Become conversant with the basic history and principles of the Unitarian and Universalist faith traditions, and reasonably comfortable talking with others about what your experience at First Parish means to you.

• Meet six new and interesting people here at First Parish who you didn’t know before you came here, and become friends. And if you think your current friends might like what we do here as much as you do, invite them to visit us, so that we might get to know them too. This is how communities grow, one relationship at a time.

• Have Fun! It’s the sine qua non of life at First Parish. (If you’re not really sure what that means yet, don’t worry. Learning obscure stuff like this is half the fun anyway!)

***
[These are just some random thoughts I sent to my leadership team regarding our advertising/public relations strategy, and how I felt we might most effectively target those resources]

THINKING ABOUT OUTREACH

A lot of people have been expressing to me a desire to see First Parish do something more effective in the way of advertising, in order to attract more people to our congregation. But in my experience, effectively advertising a church can be a tricky business, where if you don’t know what you’re doing it is easy to spend an awful lot of money without much positive result (and in some cases, even a negative one). So here are some of my reflections on the subject, as we start to think about moving forward in this area.

• The notion that we can simply purchase more and better advertising and that more (and better) people will begin attending church on Sunday mornings as a result is deceptively naïve. We need to be very specific, targeted, focused and intentional about what we hope to accomplish in “marketing” First Parish, and how best to go about achieving those objectives in an effective and economical way.

• One specific starting place might be to examine more closely what we are already doing in the way of “static” advertising (our exterior and interior signage, our pamphlets and literature, our Yellow Pages ads, our Saturday newspaper ad, and especially our newsletter and website), in order to determine whether or not we are portraying a consistent identity (or “brand”), and how we might better use these tools to reinforce the identity we would like to portray.

• Likewise, rather than presuming that the purpose of a Public Relations campaign is simply to attract more newcomers through the front doors (who may or may not return and eventually join First Parish), we might frame our objectives in both a broader and a more nuanced manner, by asking:

--what might we specifically do to improve the image, reinforce the identity, and raise the visibility of First Parish in the larger community? [i.e. to increase our “brand recognition”]

--what can we do to promote specific events of interest to the larger community other than Sunday Services that are taking place here at First Parish? [i.e. to create and promote alternative entry points]

--what can we do to inspire our current members to become more deeply involved at First Parish, and to encourage them to invite their friends?

Finally, I just want to make it clear that advertising alone is not going to grow the church all by itself. It’s just not enough merely to get people through the front door; we also need to welcome them warmly, anticipate their needs and desires, and effectively satisfy those expectations so that they will return and bring their friends. If we FAIL to do these things, we are probably better off NOT advertising, since newcomers who are disappointed by their experience here will probably tell their friends as well….

Transitions (long)

2007-08-21T06:21:00.000-04:00

OK, it’s official: as of midnight August 20th I am no longer the settled Parish Minister of the [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], Massachusetts. And even though I’ve been out of the parsonage for several weeks now (at their request, so that they could prepare it to rent out to new tenants), living here in Portland and ramping up for the start of the new program year with my new congregation, I’m still feeling very much “in transition,” and trying to find closure on my four year ministry among the mosquitos in Thoreau’s “City in the Woods.”

But first, the Big Move. The crew of two strong, healthy young men and a rented truck was scheduled to arrive at 10 am two weeks ago Friday to help me finish packing what I thought would be “a few last things,” then load the truck for the two hour drive back to my new place here in Portland. A week earlier I’d rented both a lovely two-bedroom walk-up apartment on the second floor of an old Victorian house in the West End, and also a studio at the Eastland Park Hotel (which I’m planning to use as my study), and I thought I’d been pretty specific over the phone about everything that needed to be moved. But when the truck pulled into my driveway (at about a quarter of 11), the two strong, healthy young men took one look at the stuff I’d packed so far and said “We’re going to need a bigger truck.”

So they called their boss back in Maine, who arrived around 2 pm with yet another guy and a second truck, and between the five of us we managed to get everything packed up and loaded by around 7 pm. When we arrived back in Portland two hours later, we were met by two MORE guys, and still it took us until nearly 2 AM to get both trucks unloaded.

As they left one of the strong, healthy young men mentioned to me that there had been over 250 cartons of books alone (I’d lost count after the third trip to the store to buy more boxes), so if you figure an average of 20-25 books/box...well, you can do the math. And no, I haven’t read all of them; haven't even come close. I could probably start reading right now and do nothing else for the rest of my life, and still not finish them all before I died. So keep your eyes peeled for a “help me find my peace of mind by buying a piece of my mind” used book sale. I mean, do I REALLY need six copies of Walden? Simplify! Simplify!

I’ve also been thinking about my UUA exit interview, which for various reasons (time, distance, conflicting schedules, and intervening events like the death of my mom) I still haven’t completed. But at least I've seen the exit interviews from the previous minister and lay leaders of my present congregation, so I kind of know what I’m in for. The first two questions are “What do you see as the three most significant accomplishments during your tenure?” and “What were your frustrations and disappointments during this time?” -- and that little one-two punch alone is enough to lay me out cold. Because in many ways, my entire four year tenure in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], was simply one long ordeal of frustration and disappointment. And even though four years is the longest I’ve ever served any single congregation, it still feels like I accomplished very little there.

The reasons for this are complicated, but one key theme I’ve identified is that most of the other congregations I’ve worked with in the past were highly motivated to change and grow, and had contracted with me specifically to facilitate that change and guide them through it. But in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT, AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES}, as it turned out, the situation was just the opposite. This was a congregation which had pretty much done things the same way for so long (and already felt like everything was perfect and they could do no wrong), that over the years they had gradually lost touch with their growing edge in the surrounding community, as well as started to lag seriously behind their nearby neighboring UU congregations in terms of Programing, Stewardship, and Membership Growth. Many of them envied all the excitement and activity of the so-called full service "Program" churches they saw all around them, in Concord, Bedford and especially Littleton; but at the end of the day the stubborn minority didn’t really want to have to pay the price of change and growth...or for that matter, really change or grow at all.

I know it’s a cliché that New England churches are set in their ways, change-resistant and conflict-avoidant, reserved, tightfisted, and frugal to the point of parsimony, but I'd always thought that those were just stereotypes. And despite its "rurality" (a made-up word frequently used by [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES] to describe the attractiveness of their idyllic "faux rural" suburban lifestyle), [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES] is anything but your typical New England small town. Statistically, [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES] is the third wealthiest community in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (trailing only Weston and Dover). The median household income in this affluent and privileged bedroom community of two acre minimum zoning is $144,000/year (and the average closer to a quarter-million). Housing prices start at around a half-million dollars...for a tear-down. But the average pledge at the [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], was (and, unfortunately remains) less than $1000/year -- two-thirds of what it is in both neighboring Concord and Bedford. Correspondingly, my salary was only two-thirds of what a High School teacher with similar credentials is paid at Concord/[NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], High School. And, unlike those schoolteachers, I did not receive a single raise (or even a Cost Of Living Adjustment) the entire four years I worked there.

But enough of my whiney bad attitude. There were a lot of good things about my ministry in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES] too. In fairness, the faults of the congregation in many ways merely reflected the larger faults of the town itself, where taxes are high and expectations even higher, and nobody wants ANYTHING in their back yard (except maybe acres and acres of town-owned Conservation Land). The church itself was actually one of the happier and more humane landmarks on the landscape of that community, and one of the few places (apart from the Post Office, the Public Library, the little "Country Store" and the Transfer Station) where someone could actually sit down and speak with their "Neighbours & Fellow Cretures." I made a more than a few new friends there myself, did some especially effective one-on-one pastoral care, dragged the church kicking and screaming (and I do mean kicking and screaming, and at times even biting and scratching) through the Welcoming Congregation process, and was at least able to bring out into the open some of the (how should I say?) "less-than-optimal" institutional dynamics that were frustrating to everyone and holding the church back. Our All-Church "Open Space" Visioning Event last February was truly inspiring, and almost tempted me to stick around a little longer. But God was calling me to "a greater field of service," so once again this restless, peripetatic soul packed his library and migrated back to the sea.

And I guess I would have to say that this was my most important learning experience in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES. There is an awful lot of territory between perfection and catastrophic failure. Most leadership takes place somewhere in that ambiguous realm between “Sustaining Success” (and possibly even eventually “taking it to the next level”) and the painfully obvious need for a dramatic “Turnaround.” The [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES] could have been a textbook example of what Harvard Business School professor Michael Watkins calls a “Realignment” situation, where the greatest institutional challenges are not so much finding new technical solutions to glaring technical problems, but rather getting people to see and recognize that there are problems to begin with, and then creating the momentum (and sense of urgency) to build upon existing strengths in order to overcome those shortcomings. It’s about navigating institutional cultural and politics rather than providing professional expertise; or, more precisely, about changing culture by introducing new “external” benchmarks, and getting complacent people to buy in to re-evaluating old standards of success and performance which are now out of touch with evolving external challenges.

Once I’d figured this out, it became my mantra for the last year and a half of my ministry there, although by that point I already had one foot out the door anyway, so I’m not really sure how effective I was. I started out as a cheerleader, but I ended up a scold.... And I never really did get a chance to be the quarterback -- that would have just been too much authority for someone who basically earns less than a schoolteacher. In fact, I couldn't even get them to look at the playbook.

On a more positive personal note, I also arrived in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES]with an undiagnosed health problem (sleep apnea) that one of my parishioners noticed (since her husband suffered from the same issue), and since being effectively treated for that my quality of life and general energy levels have improved dramatically. And I still feel like [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES]was a good place for me to land after completing a very satisfying two-year interim ministry on Nantucket (which was unfortunately accompanied by the end of my 18 year marriage). And it did serve as the springboard for me being called to this pulpit in Portland, about which I could not be more thrilled. I’m sure as time passes and memories fade, the things I will recall most will be the happier times, and not the financial stinginess, the petty bickering, and (of course) the ubiquitous mosquitos. And it really is a very pretty little church. Always looked beautiful on my business card, or at the top of my Annual Christmas letter.

In any case, (and with a tip of the hat to the movie “High Fidelity”), here are the top five things I am going to miss about my ministry in [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES]...

5) Concord. And not just the “historic” Concord of Ralph Waldo Emerson, the Old Manse, Little Women and Walden Pond, but the community of Concord...with its restaurants and bookstores, its active adult recreation program, its train connection into Boston, and all the other little cultural amenities which [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], lacks. I’m especially going to miss the Monday/Wednesday Over-35 pick-up basketball games at the Hunt Gym. Those guys were great fun to play with (with one or two exceptions) as those of you who have ever read my Obi-Wannabe-Kobe blog already know.

4) The Neighborhood of Boston. Harvard University. Davis Square. The North End. The Quincy Market and Fanueil Hall. The Boston Athenaeum and the Massachusetts Historical Society. Fenway Park. Beacon Hill and the Back Bay. Not to mention UUA headquarters and all my wonderful colleagues in the Mass Bay, Ballou/Channing, and Clara Barton Districts. Even though I grew up in Seattle and lived for fourteen years in Portland Oregon, Boston still seems like a second home to me. And I suspect this is true for a lot of Unitarian Universalist ministers.

3) The all-you-can-eat lunch buffet at the Bamboo Restaurant in Westford...now also served at their new location in Bedford. Fred Small (the minister in Littleton) introduced me to this place, and I’ve been eating lunch there practically once a week ever since. The Chang An in Concord has a pretty decent buffet too, but it’s nothing compared to the Buffet @ Bamboo, which features not only a fantastic assortment of both appetizers and main dishes, but also fresh Sushi and Ginger Ice Cream for dessert!

2) The Boston Sports Club in Waltham. Where the Celtics work out. One of the great things about this gym is that I was able to join in Lexington at a sharply discounted “clergy” rate, but then was allowed to upgrade to “Passport Premium” and work out at whatever club I liked (including those in Washington, Philadelphia, and New York) for just an additional $5/month. Or something like that. Frankly, it’s been so long I can’t remember. Fantastic facility. Olympic-sized pool, a wide assortment of cardio- and resistence-training equipment, a full-sized basketball court, a sauna, steam room, and Jacuzzi...plus an on-site masseuse. I just wish there were one in here in Portland (where it looks like I will be joining the “Y” instead).

And I guess this is all a little disingenuous, since NONE of the things on my list so far really have ANYTHING to do with [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES per se. But perhaps these these next half-dozen small things together will add up to one big thing worthy of the final spot on the list.

1a) Kimball’s Ice Cream stand. Of course, there is a bigger Kimballs in Westford. And another one right up the road in Bedford which is generally not nearly so busy. But at least I could walk to the one here, and if I was lucky and timed it right I could also sometimes stop and watch a ball game at [NAME REDACTED TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND CONFOUND SEARCH ENGINES], on my way back home.

1b) Dribbling a basketball in the house whenever I wanted at any hour of the day or night without having to worry about disturbing the downstairs neighbors. Who were mostly mice, ants and silverfish anyway. With an occasional rat or roach thrown in.

1c) The Belltower. I know a lot of folks would find it annoying to live next door to a church clock which chimed the hour 24 hours a day. But I generally found it comforting to be routinely reminded of the time, except maybe on those Saturday nights when I was still up late working on my sermon, or perhaps just tossing and turning in bed trying to get to sleep.

1d) Huber Honey. Produced by local bees kept by local beekeeper and longtime choir member Ernie Huber. Available only at the annual Autumn Harvest Fair (and sometimes, if the bees have been especially busy that summer, at the Annual Christmas Greens Sale). It’s the best.

1e) The Annual Strawberry Festival. And OK, if the truth be told, also the Harvest Fair and the Greens Sale. But NOT Old Home Day (except maybe for the traditional firefighters community chicken BBQ)....

1f) ...being able to walk the dog off her leash without ever having to worry about picking up “lawn sausages” with a plastic bag....

Crucifixion Redux

2007-08-14T19:01:00.000-04:00

PB & J — PeaceBang and Jesus. One of my all-time favorites.

My pal Vickie Weinstein (who once made me famous for 15 seconds by giving me a fashion makeover on ABC's "Nightline"), has written a thoughtful reflection on "the way we treat the J-Man in the UU Church", which she's titled "The Meaning of the Cruxificion." I commented over on her blog, and now here's a slightly expanded version of that comment here on my own.

For as long as I can remember, I’ve taken a very simple and pragmatic view of anastasis — the Teacher is Dead, but the Teaching Lives On, and that everything that Jesus ever said or did or stood for still "stands up," and is just as True Now as it was then (or ever more shall be). And back when I was young and fiesty and preaching in West Texas, I often liked to blow away my more evangelical friends by suggesting that I was seeking a Christian Faith which I could still trust and live by not only if Jesus DIDN’T rise from the dead, but even if it could be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he had never lived at all.

We live in a culture which, for better or worse, has been profoundly shaped by Christianity as both it and us have evolved together symbiotically over the past two millenia. It's true that nowadays we tend to see ourselves as a pluralistic society (and this "liberal/secular humanism" is itself very much a product of the Christian experience -- or perhaps I should say "the Judeo-Christian heritage"), in which values of dialogue, toleration, and respect for diversity are essential components to our self-understanding (even if they do sometimes bring us into conflict with less "enlightened" faith traditions for whom Zeal still trumps both Reason and Understanding). But unless we are also capable of understanding ourselves and how we came to BE this way, we still run the risk of falling back into the slimey swamp of sectarian self-righteousness out of which our forebearers so boldly crawled.

Our post-modern, post-Christian liberal Protestant "living tradition," which so enthusiastically embraces the Wisdom of ALL the World's "authentic" Faiths, also has a specific history and cultural context. We may like to THINK of ourselves as the most pure and perfect expression of 19th century Transcententalist minister Theodore Parker's "Absolute Religion." But we are really just a blister on the butt of the Body of Christ, where the Armour of God rubbed a little too uncomfortably around Christendom's expanding girth.

I won’t preach the whole sermon here, but if anyone wants to read more about my views (and assuming my html tags are OK), here’s a link to what a retired Methodist minister once told me was the best Easter Sermon he'd ever heard, “Easter, Again?” And a SPOILER ALERT!!! to the good people of First Parish: you're likely to this same message next Spring, when I deliver my first Easter Sermon for you.

"Congregations Count"

2007-08-09T18:54:00.000-04:00

Thought I'd take a break from the Herculean (or is it Sisyphusian?) task of unpacking books here at my new place in Portland Maine to post something I've been carrying around on my hard drive for over a month.

These are some notes and reflections from a workshop offered at General Assembly by Linda Laskowski, who as I recall (having long ago tossed away my GA program) is or was the Membership Coordinator at our church in Berkeley CA.

This was one of the best GA workshops I've attended in a long (and I mean LONG) time, because it brought together several different things I've been interested in almost my entire career and presented them in a very thoughtful and (more importantly) useful package.

So thanks Linda! (although in fairness I really ought to mention that anything here that doesn't quite seem to make sense was probably added by me).

***

Processes are things that happen over and over again. Process Improvement Techniques can be used to evaluate and improve them.

• break down each process into its separate and discrete steps

• measure each step and convert those measurements to a ratio

• track change over time, and

• compare your ratios to external benchmarks in order to measure your performance.

Sometimes just the process of identifying your "key processes" and analyzing their constituent steps will bring noticeable improvement all by itself, since this also encourages simplification, thus helping to make things that are done routinely as “routine” as possible. Simply creating clear and coherent “Standard Operating Procedures” (SOPs) which are transparent and measurable, easy to teach, and consistently repeatable, will often improve performance dramatically.

With respect to the processes related to Outreach and Membership Growth, Linda has essentially defined steps very similar to the ones outlined by Roy Oswald in The Inviting Church. So if you're familiar with that work, this will all make even more sense.

Generating Public Awareness (Oswald's "Attraction") -- Membership Growth teams often want to start with ways to do better publicity in order to create “increased visibility.” But from the perspective of process improvement, this is both a difficult benchmark to measure, and also the trickiest to significantly influence. Based on previous studies, only approximately two-tenths of one per cent of the general population are “aware” of Unitarian Universalism in any significant way beyond the level of a punch-line on “A Prairie Home Companion.” So one should assume low public awareness from the start.

More to the point, campaigns to raise public awareness are generally very expensive and yield only marginal results in comparison to their cost, thus making it at best a step to be taken later rather than sooner, only after you have already improved the portions of the process over which you have more effective control.

First Time Visitors ("Initiation" or "Orientation") -- Make it a priority to greet and welcome ALL visitors warmly, but track the local ones who are also prospective new members. Three most frequent sources of visitors are friends, family, and the internet. How do we know? We ASK right on the visitors card. The use of “check the box” rather than “fill in the blank” (i.e. “how did you hear of us?”) significantly increases the response. Also:

• Greet people AS they arrive...first impressions are formed in the first five minutes, and will generally determine whether or not a visitor will return.

• Ask how they learned about you. Ask what they are interested in.

• Help them create a handmade name badge, and use that time to collect their contact info.

• Send e-mail or post card within the week! (preferably within 48 hours).

Benchmark: growing churches have a 1:1 ratio (or better) of annual first time visitors to actual members (so, “each one bring one” really is true); churches which are NOT growing generally can’t meet that benchmark.

Return Visitors (Oswald's "Exploration") are three times more likely to join the church than one-time visitors. So focus on creating more of them!!! Have a permanent name tag waiting for them, as well as some sort of “coupon.” (coffee with the minister?) Then ask everyone to return their badges to a central location (like a basket) so you can measure attendance that way.

Track attendance for at least six months (Linda had several good ideas for doing this, but mostly it's a matter of paying attention) -- try to measure ratio of repeat visitors to total visitors (i.e. what percentage of first time visitors return within six months).

Also attempt to track the non-returnees. Try using the anonymous “Survey Monkey” for an informal "exit interview"-- What was your experience here? Why did you decide not to return?

Benchmark: growing churches report anywhere from 20-40% of first-time visitors return for a second visit.

Formal Membership (Oswald's "Commitment"): what percentage of visitors actually eventually “sign the book” (& pledge)...

Growing Churches: 15-20%+

Declining Churches: less than 10%

Active Membership (“Going Deeper; Being Sent”) “task, role, group” -- track this carefully! The point is to encourage everyone to do one thing for themselves (i.e. a class, or participation in an on-going Fellowship Circle like a Small Group Ministry Covenant Group) and one thing for the Church/Community (some sort of volunteer or leadership position).

Often these things overlap, but don't ASSUME that they will -- actively encourage people to think of their involvement beyond Sunday Worship in both of these dimensions (which are basically just synonyms for the old-fashioned practices of "Discipleship" and "Vocation" or "Ministry").

Also remember this: NO ONE in their right mind joins a church because they want to give away their money and serve on a committee. They do those things because by doing so they contribute to something larger, more meaningful and more important to them. So make sure that they aren't disappointed!

Benchmark: 65% or more (the higher this number, the less likely they will be part of your “back door”...

Attrition Most churches typically lose between 10-12% of their membership each year. Much of this is unavoidable -- perhaps 5% move away, and another 2-3% die...leaving only about a third of this number (i.e. 3-4%) up for grabs.

***

The nice thing about tracking these numbers is that they not only allow you to measure how well you are doing, they also force you to pay attention to the process itself, and to focus in on the places where you are either doing well or falling short.

But even before you begin to target your efforts this way, here are The Five Best Membership Growth Ideas Ever (i.e. the five more effective things you can do right away to improve newcomer hospitality and increase the likelihood that first time visitors will return and eventually become active members of your congregation).

• Hire a paid, part-time Membership Coordinator. Or (if you must) find someone who has the both time and the inclination to do the work of a paid, part-time membership coordinator without pay.

• Develop a highly visible, easy-to-follow “Pathway to Membership.” Some folks like to stick their toes in the water, while others like to plunge right in. But a well-defined path can accomodate both, and still allow them to move along it at their own most comfortable speed.

• Use Roving Greeters Effectively. You can call them whatever you like -- Hospitlers, Guardian Angels, even “Pineapple People” (as they are known in Berkeley) -- but meaningful, one-to-one personal contact is essential! So assign an adequate number of “roving greeters” for every service, and give THEM the Gold Coffee Mugs! Recruit your greeters from the demographic groups you hope to attract, and make sure they are knowledgeable about the programs that newcomers are likely to be most interested in.

• The Personal Touch. Greet newcomers as they arrive at the front door, make a friendly follow-up contact within 48 hours, and make a point of personally welcoming them again (by name if you can) when they return a second time.

• Website, Website, Website!!! Back in the day, the one piece of publicity a church couldn’t live without was a good Yellow Pages ad. Before that, it was a great sign or a sidewalk readerboard. And before that, it was a tall steeple, and a loud bell. But today it is a great webpage. So don’t ignore your web presence -- it is probably the first thing about your church people are going to see and notice. Make it user-friendly and easy to navigate, fill it with friendly and inviting images (rather than a lot of dense text), and make sure it gives newcomers the kind of information they will want to know (like what time church starts, what to expect during the service, how people dress, etc. etc.). You won’t regret it.

Some Advice for Rookie Ministers

2007-07-26T08:16:00.000-04:00

Well, I'm back now from my month-long sojourn in the Pacific Northwest; I've found an apartment in my new community of Portland Maine; I've finished Harry Potter; and the movers are scheduled to arrive next Friday. So in the meantime (in between trying to pack my books, that is) I suddenly have a moment to blog again.

Recently I responded to a request for advice and encouragement from someone who was beginning their first ministry. Since they seemed to like what I had to say, I thought I'd polish it up a little and post it here....

***
The "technical" aspects of our job are relatively easy; if you don't know something you can generally look it up, and if you don't know where to look it up, you can always ask a colleague. It's navigating the complicated cultural, political, and interpersonal dimensions of ministry that always seems to trip people up. So let people know up front and often that you like them, that you really care about them, and that while you certainly aren't perfect at the very least they can count on you to be trustworthy and reliable and sincere. Try not to make promises you can't keep, and keep the promises you make. That sort of thing.

A word of Encouragement? Easy. Ministry is a very hard job which by definition will take everything you have to give it and then ask for more, and is almost certainly guaranteed to routinely break your heart. It can be frustrating, discouraging, disappointing, and at times profoundly disillusioning...but it is also an extraordinarily rewarding job in ways that are almost impossible to measure. So don't be afraid of being the "real deal," or engaging people authentically on a deep level. That's what they're paying you to do. And that's why many of us don't really think as much about our paychecks as we should (unless we really have to), and would keep doing this work for free if we could afford it.

Anyway, if these all sound like platitudes, it's because they are. Cliches don't get to be cliches by accident. But good ministry must be more than merely platitudes and cliches. Preach the best sermons you know how, and keep working and learning how to make them even better. Make your hospital visits, return phone calls and e-mails promptly, write those thank you notes, practice a spiritual discipline, and don't let the merely urgent distract you from the truly important. And have fun. Ask the important questions rather than trying to supply all the answers, but don't be afraid to articulate the shared vision you are hearing all around you. That's also you're job: to say out loud what the community is thinking in silence.

And remember this too: you can't do it all yourself. So find the kindred spirits and the sympathetic souls and empower them to share your ministry. There's one other thing too, something I heard the other day from Wayne Clarke in one of his workshops in Portland: that before people can learn to give generously they need to be able to receive graciously. That goes for us as well. Your people really want you to succeed. So let them help you be successful, and don't worry so much about who gets the credit.

At the end of the day, and at the dawn of each new one, Ministry is about Fidelity. Faith-full-ness. Learning to Trust, and to Believe in yourself, believe in your people, believe in the values and principles that make our faith trust-worthy. If you can embody that lifestyle in humility and gratitude, generosity and service, with both wisdom and good humor, you will do well. Or at least as any of us ever does in this strange and wonderful work.

TO THE EMERALD CITY AS FAST AS LIGHTNING!

2007-06-30T13:09:00.000-04:00

Drove down to Seattle yesterday afternoon to meet PeaceBang and take her to dinner at one of my favorite Seattle restaurants overlooking the Ballard Locks. Unfortunately, it’s been 22 years since I last lived in Seattle, and that restaurant no longer exists (or, more accurately, it is now open only for catered “events”)...so instead we ate at another of my favorite Seattle restaurants overlooking Fisherman’s Terminal, and then went shopping at Archie McPhee’s for new household gods and a Jolly Roger to fly at the masthead of the eight foot El Toro I learned to sail on when I was a kid on Camano Island, and which my eldest nephew has just refurbished, repainted, and will hopefully claim as his own.

Leaving me free to buy a NEW boat, of course....

Not that a native Seattlite of Scandinavian descent really needs an excuse to acquire another boat. I once read somewhere that there are more boats per capita in Seattle than anywhere else in the world...or maybe it was just the United States...but that was a long time ago, and who knows if it was really true anyway. Although it is true that there are only three seasons in Seattle: the Rainy Season (which is also sometimes known as Ski Season), the Boating Season, and Indian Summer. Or perhaps Basketball, Baseball, and Football seasons, if your tastes run more to watching rather than doing (which is relatively rare in Seattle). The Sonics, the Mariners (formerly known as the Pilots, and before that the Rainiers in the old Pacific Coast League), and of course the Washington Huskies...who must now share a season (although thankfully no longer a stadium) with the Seattle Seahawks.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Arrived here in Seattle on Monday (which would have been my mother’s 73rd birthday), and met up with my aunt and my Seattle brother and his family at Safeco Field to watch the Mariners demolish the Red Sox 9-4. This was the first baseball game my aunt had been to since July 27, 1969, when as a 12-year-old I persuaded her to take me to Sick’s Seattle Stadium to see the Pilots play the Red Sox in what turned out to be a 20 inning marathon which the Sox finally won 5-3. I’d asked my aunt to take me to a double-header, but she said that was too much baseball for her and declined...so witnessing one of the longest games in Major League history was apparently both divine retribution and a near-lifetime supply of our national pastime for her. But devotion to her sister took her out to the ballpark one more time, and this time at least there was a more favorable outcome, that is for Seattle fans.

Spent Monday night at my aunt’s home on Capital Hill, and then Tuesday caught the ferry to Vashon Island to visit a friend of mine from the PhD program at the University of Oregon, and to meet her husband and daughter. That night the Mariners beat the Red Sox 8-7 in a back-and-forth slugfest in which the local team drew last blood...or so I read, since I didn’t hear or see any of it. But I did enjoy a fantastic meal, a fantastic view, and a fantastic conversation with a Medieval Historian turned full-time mom and her soon-to-be-retired husband. Can’t really say that I’m jealous of their idyllic island lifestyle, since it couldn’t happen to a nicer family. But I sure do envy them a bit...

Spent Wednesday morning exploring Vashon a little more, then caught the ferry back to West Seattle and listened on the radio as the Mariners got out the brooms and swept the BosSox in a 2-1 extra inning victory, with Ichiro scoring the winning run on a misplayed ball by Manny at the left field wall. So the spirit of my mother was clearly in full force, and the Red Sox slunk back home to Fenway with their tails between their legs. Of course, if anyone (other than Jason Varitek) actually WORE their Red Sox out where people could see them, maybe there would have been a different outcome.

In any event, arrived at the cabin on Camano Island late Wednesday afternoon, and have enjoyed a couple of days here just doing laundry, walking on the beach, and allowing Parker to run free off her leash. My Seattle brother and his family will arrive later today; New York brother and his family are scheduled to arrive late Sunday night. We’ll all spend the Fourth of July here together as we have for so many summers when our mother was still living; her Memorial Service will be at 2 pm Friday July 6th at the Stanwood Senior Center. If you’re in the neighborhood and knew my mom, please drop by. We’d love to see you.

Stumptown Sojourn part two

2007-06-25T10:25:00.000-04:00

OK, now that I’ve described all the things I DIDN’T do at General Assembly, let me tell you some of the things I DID.

• I did manage to refrain from buying anything at the UUA bookstore, and to stay away from Powells. Ordinarily book shopping is a highlight of my GA experience, but as someone who will be returning to Massachusetts in a few weeks with the challenge of packing up everything that I own and moving it to Maine, more books are the LAST thing I need right now.

• I did spend an afternoon staffing the UU Historical Society booth in the Exhibition Hall, and also attended both UUHS workshops: one by Cindy Tucker about her new book on the Eliot women (which, I’m embarrassed to say, came at kind of an awkward time in the afternoon, and put me right to sleep), and the other by Barbara Coeyman about “Creating Congregational Histories” which was full of good ideas about preserving, interpreting, understanding and honoring our history, and actually helped wake me up. I’m relatively new to the UUHS board, and now that I’m moving down east I’m not sure how effectively I’m going to be able to perform my new duties as treasurer of this venerable organization. But I believe in its mission, and would kinda like to see UUHS become as revitalized as the UU Christian Fellowship became while I was serving on that Board.

• I also attended a handful of other very stimulating workshops: one on UU blogging featuring a panel of my favorite bloggers, one by Peter Henrickson about Church Personnel Management, an extremely thought provoking session by Linda Laskowski of the UU church in Berkeley CA about using Deming-style Process improvement techniques to understand and improve our Newcomers Hospitality and Membership Growth practices, and finally a workshop led by UUA Stewardship Director Wayne Clark about his new book, Beyond Fundraising. These last two workshops in particular generated over a dozen pages of insights, observations and reflections in my diary, and are certainly worthy of entire postings in their own right. But not today.

• I attended the First Unitarian Church of Portland Oregon’s “Breatkthough Congregation” workshop, and also their Sunday morning church service, where I heard Marilyn Sewell preach about climate change. The breakthrough congregation presentation was interesting to me because I was, of course, an arm’s length witness to that entire course of events, so I was very impressed by how accurately and succinctly Associate Minister Tom Disrud (who started his career as a journalist) was able to summarize how an unlikely combination of circumstances came together in a timely manner to create a significant growth window for that congregation, and then the struggles they had afterwards to adjust to those new dynamics, and create the thriving congregation I worshipped with Sunday.

Also enjoyed running into a few of MY old parishioners from Hillsboro who are now attending First Church, and touring the new Buchan Building which has just been completed and is awaiting a few finishing touches over the summer. Melissa Buchan had been the head of the Lay Pastoral Care team the year I worked as the summer minister at First Church, and truly both a fine person and a lovely soul. The new building is a terrific tribute to both her influence and her generous involvement with that congregation in both life and death.

I also had dinner with my former wife to celebrate what would have been our 22nd wedding anniversary, and I even let her pay. After all, she’s the trial lawyer with the (I assume, since it’s been awhile since we’ve filed a joint tax return) six-figure income and the beautiful Craftsman Bungalow just one block from our daughter’s home in Southeast Portland. And to tell the truth, I couldn’t be more proud of her success. She’s certainly worked plenty hard to achieve it.

I do regret not being able to meet up with many of my other Portland friends who were not in church on Sunday or attending the General Assembly. I’m especially disappointed that I wasn’t able to see my former Oregon State University professor Marcus Borg (who lives in Portland, and was leading a seminar at Trinity Episcopal Church with John Dominic Crosson later that same week), or the former president of the start-up Wy’East congregation near Reed College, where we started a campus ministry program that has now helped turn out four UU ministers...including one of the adult advisors! But let’s just face facts. I can’t do everything. And what I did do at GA this year was actually just enough.

Stumptown Sojourn

2007-06-23T11:07:00.000-04:00

Don't ask me what I thought of the Opening Banner Parade. Didn't see it. Can't tell you about the Service of the Living Tradition, or the Open Space Technology, or even the Blogger's dinner either... didn't go. GA for me has been about hanging out with family, meeting up with old friends, and helping out with the Historical Society booth in the Exhibtion Hall. I lived for 14 years here in Portland OR, and served (or consulted with) eight different congregations...not including the supply preaching gigs. Did my internship and CPE here in the PNWD too. My first day here I couldn't walk ten feet without running into someone I knew. Sure makes socializing easy for an introvert.

Of course, now that even the hard-core extroverts are starting to hunker down, things are a lot calmer. And I've met my daughter's best friend from High School's toddler and seen their new home, eaten dinner at what my daughter's boyfriend's best friend tells me is the best BBQ place in Portland, and had a long conversation about the future of the Trailblazers (and who they are going to choose with their first round pick in the NBA draft) with a very knowledgable young man I met on the #4 bus heading downtown. Meeting some new UUs too -- including one of my new parishioners from Portland Maine. So no matter how old and familiar GA may seem, there always seem to be a few surprises too.

Early in my career, I used to attend General Assembly every year. I was married at the GA in Atlanta in 1985, received Final Fellowship at the Service of the Living Tradition at the GA in Palm Springs in 1988, and in 1990 drove home here to Portland from the GA in Milwaukee with two teenaged kids and only a Texaco gas card for provisions, after my wife lost her wallet in the airport and cancelled all of our joint credit cards. A legendary road trip which we still talk about today.

Nowadays I don't attend nearly so often. Before this GA, the last one I attended was in Boston four years ago. Was also in Quebec City the year before that, and even attended ministry days in Cleveland the year before that as well, simply to receive my interim ministry training. Split town before the start of the regular Assembly though. And before that? Well, it must have been Spokane. What year did we assemble in Spokane?....

It's nice to be back here in the Pacific Northwest -- the weather has been gorgeous, and I'm amazed by how much the city has changed in just the six years since I last lived here. And I even attended a few useful workshops...which maybe (if I'm inspired) I'll blog about later. But now it's time to get out of the house and back to the Convention Center. GA '07 in PDX is starting to wind down. And I want to be there to enjoy every last minute.

Body Image

2007-06-11T10:03:00.000-04:00

"Everything I like is either illegal, immoral, or fattening" -- W C Fields

And you don't have to look too long at me to know which way my appetites run. But today I'm wondering about the implicit corollaries: does this mean that skinny people are either criminals, perverts, or just incredibly dull? According to the BMI (Body Mass Index) calculator, I either need to lose 65 lbs or grow a foot taller in order to be considered "normal" -- and even though I'd be perfectly willing to compromise by splitting the difference, I'm afraid I'm pretty much stuck being the height I am (or perhaps even a little shorter) for the rest of my natural life.

The thing is, I don't really see myself as heavy...that is, not unless I inadvertantly catch a glimpse of myself from the side while walking past a picture window. As a kid growing up, and all throughout my twenties, I was not just thin...I was scrawny -- a walking, talking scarecrow of a man whose legs were much longer than his waist was around. No doubt smoking two packs of cigarettes and drinking a dozen cups of coffee a day was a big part of maintaining my boyish figure, but eventually I cleaned up my act, got married, and started eating regular, home-cooked meals...as well as attending lots of church potlucks and coffee hours, wedding receptions, lunch and breakfast meetings, or simply eating food passed to me through the window of my car while driving from one appointment to another. Like a lot of Americans, my lifestyle was good for about 5 pounds a year...which over the years added up to quite a bit around the middle. I came by my weight honestly, in the service of the Lord.

I think the thing that bothers me most is the stereotype that "fat" people are in some way lazy, undisciplined, and psychologically incapable of controling their own appetites. I hate what these stereotypes do to the self-esteem of young women in particular, and the relentless manner in which our society simultaneously entices us to stuff our mouths with all sorts of sickeningly sweet processed food products as though we were feed-lot cattle being fattened for the slaughter, while at the same time bombarding us with images of toned, tanned, well-developed models and the message that we are somehow morally flawed if we fail to measure up to those same standards of appearance. And, of course, there are plenty of products we can buy to help us in THAT task as well.

Of course, as a religious leader, I'm also concerned about the smug sense of sanctimonious spiritual superiority and contempt slender people sometimes exhibit toward the more rotund. Culturally, slim seems to mean disciplined, restrained, self-controlled, while heftier souls are seen as self-indulgent, slothful gluttons. But honestly now, who would you rather YOUR children play with...the happy, smiling (and enlightened) bald guy, or that long-haired emaciated fellow executed between two theives? It's just a simple question. I'm not trying to inspire a crusade or anything.

Anyway, the truth of the matter is that what you eat and the kind of lifestyle you live are much more important to your health and well-being than how much you actually weigh. According to what I've been reading (Mark Hyman, Ultrametabolism: The Simple Plan for Automatic Weight Loss), "starvation" diets and other rapid weight loss schemes tend to be a lot more dangerous than too much weight itself. When you trick your body into thinking that it’s starving, your metabolism actually slows way down, in order to try to keep you alive for as long as possible through hard times. Likewise, as you do lose weight, you tend lose both fat and muscle, while at the same time your body starts to crave all of those horrible high-calorie, high-fat foods it thinks it needs to get you going again in a hurry. So when you do finally give in to your appetite (and you WILL eventually give in...it’s like trying not to breathe), the tendency is to binge, and to gain back rapidly whatever weight you've lost. But the weight comes back almost entirely in the form of fat cells, which burn far fewer calories to sustain themselves than the muscle cells that you've lost, leaving you in even worse shape than before....

SO INSTEAD, TRY THIS....

1. Get regular exercise -- every day. Both strength training to build muscle, and interval training (which involves high exertion followed by periods of rest), in order to increase your metabolic "baseline."

2. Reduce the stress in your life. Practice regular meditation. Learn Tai Chi. Get eight hours of sleep at night, and develop a more reasonable daily schedule.

3. Drink plenty of water. And while you're at it, take a daily multivitamin. Experiment if you like with other nutritional supplements, like vitamin C or Omega 3 fish oils. Make certain your body has all the essential nutrients it needs to metabolize your food efficiently.

4. Eat early and often. Graze, don’t Gorge. Always start the day with a healthy breakfast (fruit, yogurt, granola or oatmeal, a boiled egg). Then try to eat smaller, more frequent meals throughout the day, stopping a few hours before bedtime. But there is a caveat. You can’t just “graze” on whatever high-calorie, processed snack food happens to be within reach. You also need to focus on consuming wholesome, healthy foods:

• lots of colorful fruits and vegetables.
• lots of fiber: whole grains and plants.
• natural Omega 3 fatty acids: wild salmon and free-range eggs.
• lean, quality protein: beans, nuts, fish, organic free-range meat.
• foods with a low glycemic index and slow glycemic loads.
• anti-inflammatory foods (in moderation, of course): chocolate, almonds, red wine.
• detoxifying foods: antioxidants like broccoli and green tea.

And above all, read the labels of processed foods... go for ZERO Transfats! ZERO High Fructose Corn Syrup! And just say no to all that Cake and Candy, the Cookies and Chips. Learn to take pleasure in what you eat, rather than seeing it as either a source of self-indulgence or a source of guilt. And now a few more bullet points to endeth the lesson:

• Vary your workouts: swim, cycle, golf, play basketball!
• Try to walk whenever and wherever you can. And always take the stairs.
• Eat Intentionally: Buy Locally and Organic.
• Eat Spiritually: Semi-vegetarian and low on the food chain.
• Eat Slowly. Savor the food. Savor the experience.
• Stay away from fast food restaurants. NEVER eat in your car.
• And while you're at it, get rid of your TV.
• Buy new clothes you love and which fit you well.
• Read cookbooks without guilt. Learn to love good, healthy, wholesome, homemade food.

In any event, I'm sure inspired by all of this, and I hope that you are too. But I'm certainly not going to crucify myself if I don't see dramatic results right away. I really wrote this all for myself, and am sharing it simply because...well, because I can. And because I hope that maybe someone else will be helped by what I'm learning....

* this post was written in honor and memory of my mother, Betty Jo Jensen, June 25, 1934 - June 3, 2007, who lost 70 lbs in the last year and a half of her life (after being diagnosed with diabetes), only to be killed in a matter of weeks by a very aggressive metastatic breast cancer.

A Tale of Two Monicas

2007-05-24T07:17:00.000-04:00

OK, this was just way too obvious to pass up. But honestly, which is the greater scandal -- consensual sexual activity on the job between a married man and an intern half his age (which is, admittedly, pretty scandalous), or systematically attempting to undermine the integrity of the Justice Department by hiring attorneys based principally on their ideological qualifications, and firing others because of their refusal to pursue politically-motivated proscecutions? Personally, I'm much more offended by the pink slips than I was the blue dress...but what really bothers me is my growing numbness to the feeling of outrage. Have I simply stopped paying attention? Or am I just TOO outraged to care anymore?

When I think about how much money was squandered investigating the Clintons -- and indeed, the whole "Clinton-hating" industry, that "vast Right Wing conspiracy" which seemed to live and breathe solely to slander a sitting President -- and then listen to the sanctimonious indignation expressed at Jimmy Carter's recent criticism of the smirking, scowling shortcomings of THIS administration...well, I do feel a little queasiness in the pit of my stomach. When I think about how the Rehnquist Court ruled that a sitting President could legally be deposed in a civil lawsuit because it dealt with activities outside the official scope of his office, while the current administration hides its malfeasance from Congress behind claims of "Executive Privilege," I can still feel a little outrage welling up in my throat. But when I stumble across images like this....

Well, it just makes me nostalgic for the good old days....

"Nobody cares how much you know...

2007-05-23T08:11:00.000-04:00

...until they know how much you care." Now there's a fantastic piece of advice for clergy everywhere. And maybe not just clergy either. Here are a few more words of wisdom about being a pastor, compliments of John Esau: "Ten Things I didn't learn in seminary"

When I was fresh out of seminary myself (Harvard, no less), I thought I knew an awful lot about "doing ministry," but I still had an awful lot to learn about "being" a minister. Now, after more than a quarter-century (and half a lifetime) in this line of work, it's hard for me to imagine not being a minister -- or even whether it is possible for me to stop being a minister, whether or not I am actively doing ministry at the moment. And the wisdom represented by these timeless little aphorisms seems so much more important than all the history and theology and even scripture I studied academically as a seminarian. Not that academic knowledge isn't important (and valuable) too. But without this other, it's an external knowing, rather than a knowing of the soul. Or to put it another way, no matter how much book learning we may possess (and trust me, I possess a lot), we all still learn our vocation "on the job" -- and it is only after this baptism by fire that the things we learn from books begin to make sense.

Yes, ministry is a political vocation...and like politics, all ministry is local. Our people want us to succeed, but we will never fully live up to their expectations...or even, quite frankly, our own. And so we need to learn how to get out of our own way, and let the spirit work through us. Because it's not ABOUT us. Ministry will demand everything we have to give it if we let it, and yet it will also fulfill us and renew us in ways that are hard to imagine without having experienced it firsthand. And at the end of the day, there's always tomorrow...and even when we close our own eyes to open them no more, someone will be there to "Salute the Arriving Moment." And that is part of what makes ministry both a privilege and a gift...a vocation to be embraced in humility and gratitude and devotion....

What I Wrote to the Good People at First Parish

2007-05-22T10:04:00.000-04:00

Woke up Monday morning in my hotel room at the Eastland, with the sunshine finally streaming through my window after days of gray, drizzly weather. Not that I’m complaining about the rain; after all, I grew up in Seattle, where we invented Starbucks precisely for rainy days just like the ones I experienced here. But even so, the bright morning sunlight really helped me appreciate that a new day was dawning, and that it was time to leap out of bed and enjoy it.

As I said on Sunday at the congregational meeting, I feel both deeply grateful and profoundly delighted about the overwhelming vote inviting me to settle here as your next Parish minister. And I also feel humbled by your confidence in my ministry, and as excited as all of you about the promises and the challenges of the days ahead. It is indeed customary for clergy to accept their call “with God’s help,” and no doubt I will often have occasion to appeal for Divine intervention during my tenure here. But it is really YOUR help that I’m counting on. I truly do love my job, and I like to think that over the years I’ve become reasonably proficient at it. But I couldn’t do it without all of you. Your presence and participation are what make this church possible. You ARE the congregation of the First Parish Church in Portland Maine.

These next few months will be busy ones for me, as I complete my duties in Carlisle, attend the UUA General Assembly in Portland, OR (and visit briefly with my family afterwards), and then return to Massachusetts in order to pack for my move to Portland ME sometime around the 1st of August. In the meantime, I expect to be in fairly regular contact with the lay leadership team here at First Parish, as we prepare for the start of the new program year in September. This is indeed an exciting time. Let’s all enjoy the dawning of our new day!

The Journey Home

2007-05-20T16:22:00.000-04:00

OK, now it REALLY is official. Unanimous vote this morning to call me as the next settled minister of the First Parish Church in Portland, Maine -- only the 20th called and settled minister (I'm told) in the congregation's almost 350 year history. Of course, several of those guys (and yes, they were all guys) served more than a half-century, which has a tendency to skew the curve a little. In any event, I feel both thrilled and honored by the congregation's vote of confidence in my ministry, and also humbled by the tremendous responsibility it represents. It's always a privilege when people freely choose to CALL you their minister. It's a privilege ministers must continue to earn every single day, if we are to be worthy of the honor. Discipline, Integrity, and Fidelity. Essential qualities for a minister. Essential qualities for us all.

Here's the text of today's sermon. Reading was from T.S. Eliot's "Little Gidding."

THE JOURNEY HOME

a sermon preached by the Rev. Dr. Tim W. Jensen
at the First Parish Church of Portland, Maine
Sunday May 20th, 2007

Having struggled through the blizzard and arrived at the station only to discover that the train to Boston had been delayed by snow, three Unitarian Universalist ministers retired to the bar to wait. They waited for an hour, and still no train; then two hours; until finally, after nearly three hours had passed, one of the ministers looked up from their conversation and noticed, not only had the train arrived, but that it was already pulling out of the station! Grabbing up their baggage, the three ministers sprinted for the platform. One was just able to leap aboard; then the train picked up speed, and the other two were left behind.…

A porter had witnessed this entire episode, and as the two remaining ministers passed him on their way back to their table, he called out to them “tough break, missing your train like that.”

“Oh, we’ll be all right,” the oldest and the wisest of the ministers responded. “It’s young Jensen there I’m worried about. He was here to see us off!”

OK, I admit it. Maybe this story didn’t happen exactly the way I just told it. But there’s still more truth to it than you might expect. There’s something about Unitarian Universalists — and about Unitarian Universalist ministers in particular — that makes us loathe to miss the train, or the bus, or the boat, or whatever, even when we have no particularly compelling reason from moving on from where we are. It’s the flip-side of our reputation as a questioning faith — a religion of progress and growth. We also tend to be a trendy faith, restless in our search for the avant garde, a religion of perpetual motion.

During the latter part of the nineteenth century, there was a brief affirmation, written by the Reverend James Freeman Clarke, which was very popular within our movement, and which sums up much of this questing spirit. It affirmed “The Fatherhood of God, the Brotherhood of Man, the Leadership of Jesus, Salvation by Character, and the Progress of Mankind Onward and Upward forever.”

Today the gendered language makes this statement sound archaic and vaguely inappropriate to our more “progressive” ears. But the sentiment it expresses still remains strong. We are one people, accountable to the same ultimate reality, inspired by the great religious teachers of the past, yet at the end of the day personally responsible for our own ethical choices in the quest for spiritual transcendence and its associated “free and responsible search for truth and meaning”…and the journey itself is endless: “onward and upward forever.” We see ourselves as a Religion of Progress, where the Process is more important than the Product. And this is why the habit of running for the train sometimes takes over, even when we’d come along simply to say “farewell.”

The theme of religious quest or spiritual journey is one that appears in most of the world’s great religions. But this notion that life is in some way a “perpetual pilgrimage” is really quite unique. And from time to time one also hears murmuring that, while the trip is fine, it might also me nice to “arrive” every once in awhile — to have a place where we can rest and hang our hats, a place to call our “home.”

I see evidence of this spirit everywhere — from the widespread use of common symbols (such as this flaming chalice) in our worship, to the renewed emphasis on “mission” and “covenant,” and the periodic efforts to rework our “Principles and Purposes” statement, which seems to revive itself every few years.

Some of this, I suspect, is simply a response to Unitarian Universalism’s recent growth and revitalization — the search for something new to replace the sense of homogeneity that had resulted from that old, implicit Unitarian creed of “The Fatherhood of God, the Brotherhood of Man, and the Neighborhood of Boston.” But it is also, I think, a realization that the statement “Unitarian Universalists are people who believe that beliefs must change as circumstances change” makes us sound a little wishy-washy: as though belief itself counts for little, and change is what we truly worship.

There are several related questions at issue here, and I want to take just a moment to unravel them a little, so that we can look at them together in a logical sequence. The first question has to do with the nature of pluralistic religion, in which each individual is essentially free to believe whatever his or her experience inspires them to believe. The second has to do with the idea of “progress” itself: what does it mean to progress “onward and upward forever?” And then finally (at least for this morning) is this notion of religious quest or pilgrimage, and what it is we are actually hoping to find at the conclusion of our journey.

Because of what I do for a living, from time to time I am asked by folks unfamiliar with Unitarian Universalism to explain our religion to them in twenty-five words or less: the so-called “Elevator Speech.” It’s a difficult challenge, as you might imagine, and as I’m sure many of you appreciate from your own experience. I’ve been at it for over a quarter-century now, literally more than half my lifetime; and I’m still not sure that I’m any better at it now than I was when I first started.

Outsiders sometimes simply have a tough time grasping the dynamic nature of it all. “Surely you must know that you believe,” they say. And I answer, “Yes. But what I believe and what others in my church believe are not necessarily one and the same. One of the principal tenets of our religion is that individuals must be free to seek the truth in their own way, without having the beliefs of others forced upon them.”

Usually that’s enough to get your typical Fundamentalists scratching their heads in amazed confusion. But every once in awhile I’ll run across folks who are, themselves, potential Unitarian Universalists. “But if you say that people are free to believe whatever they want,” these budding UUs will ask, “what about someone like Hitler, who sincerely believed that it was OK to murder millions of Jews?”

It’s a legitimate question, this challenging issue of Moral Relativism, one which in many ways represents the Achilles heel of our movement; and so I must explain that, no, Hitler was not a good UU — that the freedom to choose one’s own beliefs does not imply some sort of solipsistic world in which all beliefs are equally valid, and that one of the reasons that Unitarian Universalists meet in congregations such as this one is so that we can validate our beliefs (and the experiences that have informed them) by comparing them to the beliefs and experiences of other, trusted fellow seekers.

Some beliefs, quite frankly, are not as good as others; and the way that Unitarian Universalists have traditionally distinguished between the two is by looking at the results: “By their fruits shall ye know them.” In other words, Religious Pluralism is not the same as Moral Relativism; the freedom to choose one’s own beliefs is not a license to behave as one will.

Unitarian Universalists are not free to believe whatever we want or wish. We are compelled to believe what our reason and our experience tell us to be true. And since no human being is possibly omniscient (that, in the western world, at least, is a quality ordinarily reserved for God), there will naturally be a certain amount of diversity of belief within an undergirding consensus of methodology and value. The statement that human reason and human experience are the ultimate arbiters of religious truth carries with it an unspoken belief about the nature of reality, and of truth itself. And it is from this underlying sense of agreement that our freedom to disagree has its origin.

This brings us, quite naturally, to the question of Progress: how do we differentiate between a good belief and a better belief, or even between a good belief and a bad one? This is not nearly so easy a task as it might sound. Let’s take a relatively simple example.

If you are in business, and you have a gadget that will do a certain job in a certain time at a certain price, and someone brings you a gizmo that will do the same job in less time for half the price, that’s progress. (Unless, of course, you are a gadget manufacturer, in which case maybe its time to start thinking about starting a second career).

If the gizmo will do a better job, or maybe even a second job on top of the first job, but it costs a little more and takes a little longer, that may or may not be progress — it all depends on your particular needs.

And if it doesn’t do the job at all, at any price, then it’s obviously not progress, and if you go ahead and buy the gizmo anyway, you probably won’t be in business very long.

When dealing with issues of religion, however, this process becomes infinitely more complicated. Indeed, just deciding what the “job” is — what you want your religion to do for your life — is often a lifetime task. Most religions provide these answers for the believer — the “job” is to be saved, to gain eternal life. We UUs often speak of the “search for truth” as our great religious task — never specifying what it is we should do with this truth once we find it. Indeed, this is precisely the problem we’ve been looking at this morning — it’s fine to search, but what do we do if we should (God forbid!) actually find something? Are we merely looking for better ways to look? Is there no tangible core to our faith, a “job” that must be done?

It has sometimes been said that the one constant thing we can rely on in life is change. Yet it also often seems as if those who are actually closest to whatever is changing have the hardest time recognizing what is really going on. For example, we’ve all heard the phrase “A prophet is not without honor, except in their own country, and in their own house;” and I suspect most of us know the story behind it as well. At about the age of thirty, (still a relatively young man, even by the standards of his own day, although certainly no longer a kid), Jesus of Nazareth went to the Jordan River to see and hear the famous religious teacher, John the Baptist, who some thought might even be the Messiah, a prophet who would purge the nation of corrupting, foreign influences and create a kingdom in which God and God alone would rule.

And Jesus experienced something there at the River Jordan that profoundly changed his life, and the subsequent history of the world as well. In fact, he found the experience so disturbing that he actually went out into the desert for forty days (or so the tradition tells us) just to think it over. And when he came back and started to tell people about his vision, they listened in great numbers.

What did he say?

You don’t have to wait until everything is perfect in order to start doing what is right. God’s kingdom is all around us: open your eyes and see it. This is good news if you are poor; it means freedom to those who are captive and oppressed. Because this is what God wants us to do — to heal the broken-hearted, and to set at liberty those who have been bruised. This is the year acceptable to the Lord.

But when Jesus got back to Nazareth, his own hometown, the people there were a little more skeptical. “We know this guy,” they said. “Who is he to be telling us all these things? He grew up right here; we’ve all known him since he was a little baby. He’s nothing special. His father didn’t even own his own house, and had to support the family by working for wages as a manual laborer. Show us something more, carpenter’s son, if you truly expect us to believe all these crazy things you’re saying. Solve your own family’s problems before you start telling us how to solve ours.” The message was the same for everyone who heard it. But some folks were just too set in their ways to listen. They were too familiar with this newly-minted prophet; they were unable appreciate how much he himself had changed.

Now admittedly, Change is not always Progress in and of itself. Things can change for the better, and things can change for the worse. Thus, whatever changes we embrace over time regarding what we do or do not believe as the result of our religious quest should, in some way, help us to live better lives. They should help us to understand and deal with our limitations, and with the fact of our own mortality; they should help us to improve our relationships with other human beings, and with the natural world in which we live. Insight, inspiration, understanding are important. But mere knowledge alone is not enough. We also need to be able to live these changes, to put into practice the things that we have learned, in order to transform both ourselves, and the world around us.

For some, this may be as profoundly simple as learning to accept ourselves and the world around us for what we are: the knowledge that we are all going die before achieving even a fraction of our potential, and that the world will somehow survive without us. For others, it may lead to a series of crusades for civil liberties and social reform: a quest for peace and justice. I myself have always felt inspired by the sentiments of the so-called “Serenity” prayer attributed to Reinhold Niebuhr, which I have seen now in so many forms: the courage to change the things I can, the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, and the wisdom to know the difference.

This tension exists at the core of all great religious questions: a tension between accepting the limits imposed upon us by nature, and the indomitable struggle to transcend them. And progress, at least in my current view, is coming to see more precisely just where the line between them lies, and then living one’s life as close to that line as possible.

Wither, then, do we journey? And for what do we search? We search for Wholeness: for that elusive harmony of being that lingers in the boundary between mortality and transcendence. And the end of all our exploring, as the Poet tells us, will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time. Not a place in the sense of somewhere or something we might touch or taste or own; not even a spark or a soul or a supernatural force; but a Spirit: a breeze, a breath, a thing felt but not seen. A whole which is greater than the sum of all its parts, but which cannot be explained in analogy to any one of them.

And the real mystery is that while we cannot fully comprehend this reality, we do share of it — we participate in it. We are a part of the whole, and yet we are whole within ourselves, and in this sense, truly, we have been created in the image of God, and can know God best through a deep knowledge of ourselves.

Perhaps, as Unitarian-Universalists, we are forever destined to be chasing after trains. But it’s nice to think that every once in awhile we are free to sit in the lounge for a few hours longer, to savor a warming apéritif and listen to the blizzard rage around us, to enjoy the company of friends, to wait for the next train, and be a few hours late to Boston. The Journey Home does not always require perpetual motion. At times it’s important just to sit, and wait, and listen....