Comments on: Reclaiming a “vocabulary of reverence”

By: chutney

chutney — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:56:12 +0000

I’m not sure what document you’re referring to (no mention of grace that I can find in Parker’s letter).

But I’d wholeheartedly support any effort to up the standing of grace in UUism. That just about the only thing I bring from my own personal history in Methodism. Maybe “experiences of wonder” and “the interdependent web” would be good starting points for a UU theology of grace.

By: Cynthia

Cynthia — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 18:01:02 +0000

Thank you all for the comments. How does her statement about liberal religion fit with Rebecca Parker’s continuing commitment to her original Methodist faith because UUism is lacking “grace”?

By: chutney

chutney — Mon, 05 Apr 2004 21:26:34 +0000

Not to mention that her take on feminist theology is very 1990 and completely unaware of womanist critique. Okay, I’ll shut up now.

By: Melanie

Melanie — Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:05:07 +0000

This interchange has been bugging me since Chris put it up last week. In addition to your very shrewd critique, chutney, I had the following thoughts:

RC theology has been in search of the “strangeness” of God for nearly a century now. This appears to be news to Parker. That she quotes Mike Scanlon quoting David Tracy tells me that a genuine engagement with post-modernism is a long way off. Both Sinkford and Parker are locked into the failed liberal mode of discourse of late modernity. A genuinely post-modern theological investigation would have great suspicion about its own assumptions, while both Parker and Sinkford are proceeding from unvoiced truthclaims.

Had to get that off my chest.

By: Philocrites

Philocrites — Mon, 05 Apr 2004 04:09:24 +0000

Back to the reverence debate!
Rebecca Parker, president of the Unitarian Universalist seminary in Berkeley, has launched what appears to be a new round in the public conversation about UUA President Bill Sinkford’s call for a Unitarian Universalist “vocabulary of reverence.” Her op…

By: Boy in the Bands

Boy in the Bands — Fri, 02 Apr 2004 22:48:13 +0000

Yeah, what he said
Chutney at makingchutney.com: Reclaiming a “vocabulary of reverence” outlined everything I might have said (and more) about Rebecca Parker’s letter to Bill Sinkford that you should just read his posting. This matter has been floating among Unitarian Universa…

By: Tomas Gomez

Tomas Gomez — Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dear All,
Phrases like “Becky’s little letter” and “completely unaware of the womanist critique” are supreme examples of the self-centered ” I’m-so-much-smarter-than-you, you idiot” commemtary that I find soooo tiresome in UU circles. Please, I beg of you, stop the put-downs. Rebecca Parker does not introduce herself as “Becky” and the use of the word “little” gives you away. Nor is the Rev. Parker unaware of the womanist perspective, one cannot address every position every moment. Good grief y’all, Rev. Parker is not “theologically ignorant.” For shame. It would be so nice to have a real discussion of the real issue, without slinging mud and epithets. Unitarian Universalism DOES lack Grace.
Tomas Gomez

By: chutney

chutney — Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Tomas,

What specifically in Parker’s letter do you find as representing engagement with the womanist critique? In my reading, her letter exhibits exactly the privileged position of white feminism that womanism does critique.

The public, pastoral letter is a difficult genre to write. I don’t envy those who write in it. But those who write in it are open to critique. Seminary presidents can’t write a public letter on their official stationary and then expect the same treatment as someone who writes a letter to the editor.

Discussion of the real issue would be nice, which is why I’ve started this series of posts.

MyIrony is not a committee meeting, and that flavor of decorum is not expected (nor encouraged) here. You’re here in the pub, and we will get rowdy from time to time. Next drink is on me.