Dissolve the whole darn national organization, and then hold a GA of congregational delegates to decide how much of it to reconstitute, and in what size and form. Presumably that would help solve the problem of congregational apathy! (Pursuant to one of the other suggestions, the GA recommendations would be subject to congregational ratification, of course.)
Hey, Blogger finally fixed it so when I post something, CC doesn't get the byline!
Anyway, on topic.. This is a very interesting idea. I think I like it a lot. It's risky, to be sure, but maybe we need that at this point.
I like. Best so far.
Radical Fausto. . .
My own preference would be to re-establish only those functions that provide real services to the congregations -- e.g., ministerial settlement and professional support, RE curriculum development and RE professional support, new congregation formation and support -- and avoid everything that smacks of top-down hierarchy or corporate "witnessing" or "prophecy".
The function of our central organization should be to serve as our staff, not our leadership. We are its clients, not its flock. To the extent that it leads, it should be like the Process Theology God, by offering oppertunities, not by postulating standards.
Would you agree that there needs to be a centralized national body charged with "oversight" of ministry which would ensure that ministers accused of clergy misconduct of various kinds would be subject to responsible investigation and face appropriate accountability if found guilty? My own experience, and that of other victims of clergy misconduct of various kinds, including but not limited to clergy sexual misconduct, makes it abundantly clear that individual UU congregations cannot be relied upon to responsibly address clergy misconduct when it occurs. Then again my own experience and that of others victims of clergy misconduct also makes it glaringly obvious that the UUA and its Ministerial Fellowship Committee and other responsible bodies have failed and have even refused to responsibly redress serious clergy misconduct.
Why expect the beast to kill itself?. Wouldn't it make more sense to just create the spiffy new streamlined UU organization and entice the independent congregations to disassociate from the UUA and join your new organization? There are other Unitarian organizations which perhaps fall more in line with the desire not to emphasize politics.
Perhaps with a significant enough shift some of the other more desirable UUA resources would follow.
TEA: I think that would be a valid function of the UUA, but you still have the congregational polity problem. Does the UUA even have a method to 'kick out' congregations? Should it?
How much does the UUA affect you in Canada anymore? I know some tihngs are shared, but is there an analogous canadian body?
Well, we do run the beast, and sometimes fixing it is easier than replacing it (and competing with it.)
The AUC is expressly theistic, so it would not be appropriate for large numbers of UU's. (and for that reason, it would not be appropriate for me.)
It would be most interesting to see a new UU congregational body and a UU political entity started out of the same movement.
Jefferson's finest notion was scrapping the government every twenty years and starting over.
Yeesh! Another proposal from the Guy Fawkes contingent. Explosions are might satisfying if all you want is splinters. Apparently, that’s just fine with you.
Post a Comment