I really disagree with some decisions the board made recently on a matter I take seriously. I get that reasonable people can see situations differently, and while I don't agree with the way the board and a committee within the church approached this one and am particularly unhappy that the chair of said committee is now up for the board, the church is my community and I feel like I should be a part of it.
Katy-the-Wise points out that simply sitting in the congregation, week after week, as the voice of the loyal opposition is a powerful thing, and in theory I get that. But I just don't feel like I have the strength to do it. There have been a couple of Sunday mornings when I've dressed for church, been all ready to go and then not been able to leave the house.
There are plenty of other UU churches in my area. I could just pick another one and on several levels I would be happier there. Actually I know right which one I would attend.
But I've made commitment after commitment to this community. And it doesn't help that we are short of YRUU leaders at my current church as it is. I love my friends and my YRUU kids.
Different levels of community suggest different levels of commitment. I'm not moving every time Fairfax County does something I don't like, which is often as far as their parks and recreation decisions go, and the same time if I were a member of, say, a book club and they made crucial decision that I didn't really like, I'd probably just quit.
Church is kinda in between.
TheCSO's take is that "there is no non-Pyrrhic victory here" and that's true, though not terribly helpful. Actually, I'm not sure that the concept of "victory" even applies.
My inclination is to accept that even when I'm right, I don't necessarily win, go back to church and suck it up. Longtime readers will recall that when my Presby parents church fired a minister basically because she was gay, that's what my folks did and decades later their church is better for it. The church does a great deal with outreach to gays in the community and seems to be trying to atone for what I view as their sins.
Score one for the Katy-the-Wise approach.
But I'm having a really hard time doing that.
Thoughts welcome.
And, of course, those who are familiar with what happened and wish to discuss it in specific detail may email me.
CC
10 comments:
I think it falls into the "is it something I can live with" category. Every community is going to do something that doesn't sit right with us. The question is is it worth quitting over.
And remember they aren't really going to care if you quit. You will just be replaced by another member. I know that seems harsh, but I have seen it time after time. People leave thinking they are making some big statement and they may be missed, but things just keep going.
Real change probably happens if you stay.
Smile. You've articulated the problem well, Goodwolve and far more concisely than I did.
(((And remember they aren't really going to care if you quit. You will just be replaced by another member. I know that seems harsh, but I have seen it time after time. People leave thinking they are making some big statement and they may be missed, but things just keep going.)))
Oh believe me, I get that much. Some people left the church over a different issue (and one that I also disagreed on but didn't see as significant) a couple of years ago and their absence has barely been noticed.
Quietly disappearing was always the plan. After all, I care about these people and I don't want to hurt them. I just really feel like the board did the wrong thing here and am tired of hearing "Well, yes, it probably was the wrong thing to do, but it was best for the church" from my friends.
But these people have been really, really good to me.CC
I'm NOT familiar with the details about your situation, which makes it difficult for me to comment wisely, but my generic advice is that you need to look beyond the particulars of this specific event and really ask yourself what feeds you spiritually, whether this church is still your home or if perhaps you've outgrown it, what you still have to bring to the situation that will make it better, or if you are just going to end up nursing a grudge that won't go away. And the grudge may well follow you to your next congregation if you just move on WITHOUT asking (and answering) these questions, so it really is work you ought to do anyway. My experience has generally been that it this kind of situation the discontent often comes as much with dissatisfaction about the process as it does disappointment with the result -- the underlying assumption being that a better process would have led to the RIGHT result rather than the one you are trying to live with now. And yes, these decisions all get revisited over time (especially if they are the wrong decisions), so a little patience and tenacity may well eventually bring things around to a place where you are more comfortable. But to summarize.
1) Is this still your church home, or is it time to move on?
2) What kind of positive energy do you have to bring to the situation as it now exists?
3) Is this just a temporary wrong turn, or does it represent a permanent move in the wrong direction; and stay or go, can you reconcile yourself to that, or will you merely be carrying resentment with you wherever you end up going?
Good Luck!
How does this church community facilitate your spiritual development?
How does it detract from it?
What is the cost/benefit ratio?
I wish the best for you,
David Markham
I'm surprised and a bit dismayed to find myself struggling with similar questions (although presumably different irritants) myself lately.
I think the Eclectic Cleric has nailed it. It can be galling to see a congregation go on just fine without you -- especially when you leave over something that seems like a huge principle -- but we make moral compromises every day of our lives.
I won't mention the name of the huge, rich, prominent congregation (and I am sure there are more than one)where the minister had a flamboyant affair, forced his wife out, and married a rich member. It was quite a scandal. Lots of people left the congregation. Fifteen years later, the place is filled with new, younger, richer people and they don't give a damn about the ancient history. To them it's ancient and so far as they're concerned, the minister involved is an upstanding leader. And actually, they're right...other than the way he crapped on his wife and kids.
What happened in that congregation forced me to accept the reality that most people's principles don't actually get called into play in real life. You do what's convenient. If you stay, you will probably be happier in the long run than if you leave. You've invested life and your own self in this congregation and ... imagine not seeing all of them again. And that's what happens.
E.C. - I'm almost certain you know about the general situation, you're probably just not connecting it to me personally.
Email me if you're interested and I will give you the scoop and/or send you the necessary documentation so you can ascertain the scoop for yourself.
If you're not that interested in getting involved, believe me, I totally get that. I wish I weren't involved.
What feeds me spiritually is connection to other people and the free exchange of ideas. I have never had a problem doing that at this church. The sermons have never been a critical part of my free exchange of ideas as they tend to be a little simplistic for my taste, but overall the place has felt like home and like a safe place and it doesn't so much right now.
A grudge feels like anger and what I am experiencing doesn't feel like anger, it feels like sadness and worry and isolation and a deep feeling of mistrust. Of course, Tillich wrote that "depression is anger spread thin" and I can't say it's impossible that I've just chosen to spread out anger as I find depression more familiar and easy to deal with.
For short answers to your questions:
1) Is this still your church home, or is it time to move on?
It depends. Must home feel like a safe place? Mine didn't for much of my life and I survived and made it a better place. Ok, that mostly happened because everybody else moved out, so perhaps that's a bad extension of the analogy.
2) What kind of positive energy do you have to bring to the situation as it now exists?
The situation doesn't exist. The decision of the board has been to move on past a difficult issue rather than dealing with it.
The energy I would bring is to "keep on keepin' on" and keep working to make the church a place where positive things balance out the negative ones.
3) Is this just a temporary wrong turn, or does it represent a permanent move in the wrong direction; and stay or go, can you reconcile yourself to that, or will you merely be carrying resentment with you wherever you end up going?
A. Assuming the nasty situation that arose does not arise again, it is temporary. Katy-the-Wise things that having me in the pews as a reminder will make it even more likely to never happen again as I was the primary person who went before committees and met with the minister. If said situation does rise again, then it's hard to tell.
B. The church I have in mind to move to delt with a far more severe version of the same situation and dealt with it openly and in a way I approve of. In all fairness to my church, it was a long and painful process for them. I'm seriously considering having a long talk with this church's minister in the process of figuring out what to do.
And for David's questions:
How does this church community facilitate your spiritual development?
It has introduced me to a lot of new ideas and has taught me how committed I am to working with YRUU. It has connected me with devout people with a variety of spritual backgrounds, most of whom are wicked smart and I've learned so much from them. Sometimes, I've come to services wrapped up in my problems and left them considering that which is greater than myself.
Even the difficult people, and there's no small number, have taught me tolerance and ways of dealing with people who are different than I am.
I'm by nature an introvert (I know I don't sound like one on the internet, but this is the internet) and some people have worked really hard to bring me out of my shell.
How does it detract from it?At the first church I ever went to, the preaching was so fabulous that theCSO and I would leave church arguing about the sermon and taking apart the sermon's conclusions like we'd watched a really good episode of Law and Order.
The preaching isn't like that at my current church and between the Sinkford administration's frequent politicking on the UUA's behalf and the general mediocrity of the sermons, theCSO has stopped going.
More to the point, at church events, I find myself peeking around, looking for people I want to avoid as to facilitate avoiding them rather than focusing on more spiritual persuits. Maybe that will pass with time, indeed, it almost certainly will, but it's very hard to get my ass to church under those conditions, particularly on Sunday mornings with no YRUU.
I feel the introversion coming back. I find myself doing stupid little tasks on Sunday morning until "Oops! I've missed church."
What is the cost/benefit ratio?See above, I guess.
For the short version, the cost of leaving is that the only people who will be really hurt by my leaving are people who are absolutely innocent of any wrongdoing, and people know that if the situation arises again, the one person who made a fuss last time is gone. On a personal level, I will really miss my friends and YRUUers.
The benefit of leaving is that I get to start over in a place that deals with issues more directly even when it sucks to do so. I will make new friends and I will, I'm sure, be able to remain close to the old ones whom I love and who love me.
And on a personal level, I will have taken control of the situation rather than letting the situation control me.
Fausto:
If you want to have a more in=depth discussion of your church's problems vs. mine, I'm happy to do so over email.
Diggit:
(((What happened in that congregation forced me to accept the reality that most people's principles don't actually get called into play in real life.)))
That's been my shock here, too. Keep in mind, I'm usually the conservative in my congregation. I'm used to hearing people ask, shocked, about the Bush administration, "How dare they compromise America's principles in a hamhanded attempt to save America?" Yet those exact people are taking exactly that approach in being willing to treat this issue as the giant squid in the room rather than dealing with it honestly and democratically. Indeed, the primary proponant of the giant squid approach has just been nominated to the board.
CC
who really appreciates the thoughtful responses this has gotten and will read and respond to all of them.
Oy.
Scattershot:
(Board) nominations can be a very defective process. Been there, seen it up close. This, incidentally, is one of the places that our democratic process needs the most attention, IMO.
If the nomination is so odious, then find a better one, and nominate her or him. Officially. And do that work openly and have civil discussions widely with people who will listen--and will come and vote.
Couldn't make the point better than that (effectively, this person is not acceptable at this time, for this post). But do it above board, and do not let that campaign sink into the muck. Done well, this is both right and appropriate and should leave both candidates and their supporters in the church....
I've seen a butt-ugly version of disapproval of a nomination done, and the blowback for those associated is long-term distrust (but they were underhanded and even deceptive).
I don't know jack about the specifics, so I can't give any real advice. But I've seen people "leave" and stay away (and yet pledge) and come back later when a minister left or the socio-cultural problems resolved. Commitment ought to be serious and long term. If it's worth leaving, it's worth making a civil fuss, but a fuss.
It sounds like you feel an ethical boundary has been crossed and that the violation hasn't been addressed, nor corrected. That in essence, covenant has been violated and "no one" wants to have the unhappy conversation(s) needed to restore it. That's something that ought to be called out.
To... the minister? Committee on Ministry? Board? These and others might be appropriate (details, and depends on the congregation).
I tend to agree with goodwolve; leaving may be a shock to a few... but it's a scrape and will heal over. Members depart for all kinds of reasons and the obligation of any number of people is to make the normal life of the place go on (after all, it isn't all about you, or anyone else...)--and after a couple weeks... and particularly if you've been not-going a fair bit... many won't notice. Then it'll be "Gee... it's been a while since...".
Leaving it with the minister, in the form of "this is a violation, here's why" and "I'm not leaving," and "this needs resolution, because if not now, then next time--and it'll be worse..." may be effective.
:I really disagree with some decisions the board made recently on a matter I take seriously.
Welcome to the club CC. . .
:I get that reasonable people can see situations differently, and while I don't agree with the way the board and a committee within the church approached this one
Yes, sometimes the undemocratic and even anti-democratic *way* that church boards and committees arrive at bad decisions is worse than the decision itself. . .
:and am particularly unhappy that the chair of said committee is now up for the board, the church is my community and I feel like I should be a part of it.
That's funny that reflects what I felt way back in 1995 CC.
:Katy-the-Wise points out that simply sitting in the congregation, week after week, as the voice of the loyal opposition is a powerful thing,
Indeed it can be CC. Even simply walking outside the church. . .
:and in theory I get that.
I get that in *practice* myself CC.
:But I just don't feel like I have the strength to do it.
Maybe you would have the strength to do it CC if you didn't foolishly waste so much of your energy so dubiously trying to discredit me. . .
:There have been a couple of Sunday mornings when I've dressed for church, been all ready to go and then not been able to leave the house.
That sounds rather depressing to me CC.
:There are plenty of other UU churches in my area. I could just pick another one and on several levels I would be happier there. Actually I know right which one I would attend.
Aren't you the lucky one CC. Try putting yourself in the shoes of those many other U*Us or would be U*Us who only have one, or at *best* two or three, U*U church in their area. What are their options when things go wrong for them in the U*U church they attend?
:But I've made commitment after commitment to this community. And it doesn't help that we are short of YRUU leaders at my current church as it is. I love my friends and my YRUU kids.
I seem to recall that the Unitarian Church of Montreal was rather short on theists in the mid-1990s CC. I thought it could use a few more but no. . .
:Different levels of community suggest different levels of commitment. I'm not moving every time Fairfax County does something I don't like, which is often as far as their parks and recreation decisions go, and the same time if I were a member of, say, a book club and they made crucial decision that I didn't really like, I'd probably just quit. . . Church is kinda in between.
I guess you need to determine how committed you are to your U*U church then CC, to say nothing of gauge just how committed it is to you. . .
:TheCSO's take is that "there is no non-Pyrrhic victory here" and that's true, though not terribly helpful.
Sometimes the truth is not terribly helpful CC. Quite frankly my take, and possibly even the CSO's take. . . is that "there is no non-Pyrrhic victory" here.
:Actually, I'm not sure that the concept of "victory" even applies.
Probably not in both cases CC. . .
:My inclination is to accept that even when I'm right, I don't necessarily win, go back to church and suck it up.
I almost never "suck it up" when I know I am right about something CC. I don't suck up either for that matter.
:Longtime readers will recall that when my Presby parents church fired a minister basically because she was gay, that's what my folks did and decades later their church is better for it.
Really CC? Is it *really* better for them "sucking it up" or did it get better decades later because of the hard work of other people who chose not to "suck it up" and fought the "system"?
:The church does a great deal with outreach to gays in the community and seems to be trying to atone for what I view as their sins.
Right CC. and what does your parents' alleged "sucking it up" have to do with that? I am willing to bet that if *everyone* had "sucked it up" that the status quo would not have changed.
:Score one for the Katy-the-Wise approach. . . But I'm having a really hard time doing that.
Good. Then don't "suck it up" CC because AFA*I*AC "sucking it up" sucks. . .
:Thoughts welcome.
See above.
Clarification: My parents* "sucking it up" included accepting that the unfair decision wasn't going to change, but remaining committed to the notion that their church, while wrong, had good people in it who intended the best and that the best way to do that was educate people and work with them to bring more Christ's message to everybody.
There wasn't any "fighting" the system in any meaningful sense, there was a commitment among the people in the church who supported gay rights to work together, to run for the session, to invite their gay friends to church and to do some outreach themselves.
It worked. Now the session (in UU parlance, the "board") has had several gay members and that church never fails to have a table at DC's Annual Pride festival.
No protesting, no fighting, just working with people for change.
It can happen.
But that issue was an ongoing thing that the church knew it had to deal with.
My situation is different.
I think.
CC
*Mostly my mother
Post a Comment