I left the discussion group for Gadfly some time ago. I'm serving a congregation now, and will leave the discussion to those who want to continue. It seems clear to me that while some people are making a genuine effort to listen and to find some commonality, most are stubbornly refusing to hear one another and becoming even more entrenched as the argument continues.
In this case, there really are fine people on both sides. I love and esteem my colleagues. I think the majority of them are more dedicated, more productive, and more capable than I. That's not false modesty. I just don't feel entitled to judge their devotion to this faith and to the causes we all find important.
I do want to share a few things that have come across my radar. One is the following, sharing another Letter of Censure meted out by the UUMA:
A few people have asked about my letter of censure from the UUMA. I had been posting to the ministers’ group on Facebook and speaking at UUMA chapter meetings about my concerns with the UU racial-justice orthodoxy for some time. The precipitating event was
this post. (The letter of censure follows.)
Facebook post (March 2018)
A PLACE TO DISCUSS? I have reservations about current UU racial-justice ideology, and would like to find a place to discuss them with colleagues (of all races). I can’t imagine
that our moderators would allow such a discussion here. Can anyone suggest a place?
Not intending to discuss my reservations now, but so readers will know the kind of thing I’m talking about, here are brief statements of some of them:
(1) We use a non-standard definition of “racism” (racial prejudice + power) that, while emphasizing the crucial factor of relative power, tends to make anti-white racial prejudice invisible.
(2) Some UU people of color who are not African-American, whose ethnic group has not suffered anything like what African-Americans have suffered, appear to be appropriating the moral authority of African-Americans.
(3) Much of our eagerness to attract African-Americans to our congregations seems motivated by white guilt.
(4) The Commission on Institutional Change has called on congregations (2/10/18) to “answer the call to fund BLUU as an act of reparation for the denial of opportunities over centuries.” As someone who in 1969 was present at a demonstration at the headquarters
of the NY Catholic archdiocese demanding that such “reparation” be paid to African-American organizations, and who later decided it was a terrible idea, alarm bells are going off in my head.
Letter of censure
Reverend Richard Trudeau
Dear Richard,
At its meeting on March 21, 2018 the UUMA Board of Trustees voted to issue a letter of censure against you for conduct that violates our Covenant and Code of Conduct.
Specifically we found that you violated our Covenant in two areas:
• To support one another in collegial respect and care, understanding and honoring the diversity within our association;
• To use our power constructively and with intention, mindful of our potential unconsciously to perpetuate systems of oppression;
We further determined that you also violated our Ethical Standards within the Code of Conduct:
• I will demonstrate respect and compassion without regard to race, color, class, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, age, physical or mental ability or ethnicity. Such equitable treatment shall be extended to all to whom I minister regardless of position
in the organization, including to those who disagree with me.
• I will work to confront attitudes and practices of unjust discrimination on the basis of age, color, class, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, age, physical or mental ability, or ethnicity, and to challenge them within myself and in individuals,
congregations, and groups I serve.
The board took these actions as a result of complaints made against you on Facebook and in your chapter meetings. We hope that in receiving this admonishment from your fellow ministers you may take time to reflect upon how your words have been harmful to colleagues,
specifically colleagues of color.
This censure is a matter of counsel; it has no formal impact on your membership in the UUMA which you, of course, retain. However, please know that we will be in contact with your local chapter to ask how they will work to ensure that chapter meetings and retreats
are truly open to, and minimally safe spaces for, UUMA members of all identities and backgrounds, and particularly for those with historically marginalized identities.
Signed,
The UUMA Board of Trustees
Surely there are ways other than letters and censuring/censoring to deal with our differences.
Here's an article in the NYTimes I found helpful. It deals with "White Guilt," something I think is rampant among liberals, particularly UUs.
And, importantly, Kate Braestrup, a UU minister and best-selling author, has written a thoughtful and provocative column about all of this. Not being a UU minister, she can't be censured. Or can she?
To read Kate's column, click here: "Am I Still a Unitarian Universalist Minister?"
