by SCUniversalist
We force ourselves to come up with a report on our shared values -
- and then issue (and vote on) a mission statement (with an escape clause if neeed be),
- which shows folks that we do stand for something,
that we dont just believe anything,
that as nice as we think we are, we might not be for you...
and the tough message of - you will hear some stuff in the pulpit that you may not personaly believe, but hopefully you will be inspired by the rest of what is said
5 comments:
I love the idea, I assume you are talking about a Mission Statement for the UUA?
Is there not one already?
I admit I have never looked before.
Of cp ourse my first reaction is we should call it a Vision not a Mission so right there tells you how much fun getting the majority of UUs to agree on anything will be.
But still, a fantastic Idea. My favorite so far.
If there's an escape clause, how are they shared values? "This is what we believe except when we don't" isn't a very firm foundation.
I can see the advantages of adopting an actual creed. (By this I don't mean specific points of faith, but rather acceptance of broad principles.) It would certainly help with being taken seriously. The 7P's are already used as one - why not just go one step further and have some shared values that are REQUIRED?
Yes, I see the problems with this. I realize it runs counter to our stated principles. But we're mostly there already. Is it really a bad thing to have a definition that can tell us who is *NOT* a UU? If we can never look at someone who says that they're a UU and say "No you're not, and here's why", then our religion *is* "believe whatever you want".
Yo CSO,
I have pretty much being saying that for over a decade now. I have said it before, but it bears repeating. . . that UUs are very good at "affirming" and "promoting" the purported Seven Principles of UUism and other loudly and publicly proclaimed UU ideals, "statements of conscience" and indeed "mission statements" etc. etc. but do a rather poor job of actually practicing them, especially when it comes to internal U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy etc. It is not for nothing that I have chalked the following slogan onto the sidewalk in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal on more than a few given Sundays -
A "CHURCH" THAT REFUSES TO WALK WHAT IT TALKS
or indeed more recently, after becoming hilariously aware of CUC Executive Director Mary Bennett's not so Intelligent Design and *reVision* of the UU acronym for what is now known as U*Uism (at least up here in Soviet Canuckistan. . .) -
U*Us REFUSE TO WALK WHAT THEY TALK
Here is the mission statement of the Unitarian Church of Montreal that was created years after I was permanently expelled for publicly "tarnishing" the undeserved public "image" of this alleged Unitarian "church" by publicly protesting against its own very well documented injustices, abuses and outrageous hypocrisy. . .
We, Unitarians of Montreal, provide a sacred space where we embrace diversity and seek truth. We cultivate moral integrity and foster a spirit of caring, creativity and celebration of life. We nurture spiritual search and practice, affirm the democratic process in human affairs, and visibly promote social justice, sustainability, and kinship with all life in our neighborhood, nation and global community
Adopted at the AGM on June 4, 2001
Guess which alienated life form was most probably very much in "the neighborhood" of the Unitarian Church of Montreal displaying picket signs that protested against these very same Montreal Unitarians making a complete mockery of these fine words, but quite evidently insincere, even outright fraudulent and outrageously hypocritical words, via their other very well documented words and actions. . .
Allah prochaine,
The Dagger of Sweet Reason
PB2U*Us
CSO: the escape clause would be for historic reasons of course -
- people like to associate with others for more than one reason, I met a member of a far-right group dedicated to making the south in their view of a Christian Nation, and the guy was an athiest. At least he knows what company he is in.
I support this with the suggestion that it be described as an *optional* Covenant. Joining the covenant would be roughly analogous to becoming a member. (the two acts would still be seperate, you could do either or both or neither, and still be a UU.)
This would still give us a count of how many UU's are willing to sign on to supporting X statement, but without cutting off the UU's that don't.
Post a Comment