Peacebang on Unitarian hypocrisy:
We’re just as fallen as any religious movement. We billed ourselves as the saviors, the reformers, the ones who would purify the church, and we failed. We just don’t see it, because the ways we have tunnel vision are so in sync with so much of liberal, secular culture, we have no idea how deeply and regularly we violate our first principle. Watch the faces close at coffee hour when the hapless newcomer talks with warm enthusiasm about the War On Terror and you’ll know what I mean. Hear the young mother get berated for bringing in bags of Wal-Mart goods to the Christmas cookie decorating party, and watch her quietly go away. Likewise the woman who asks the pastor to start a healing prayer group and is told “We don’t do that sort of thing here,” or the man who merely questions the placement of the rainbow flag on the front of the building. Watch them all quietly go away, or maybe not so quietly. They know first-hand that we’re not really committed to tolerance and acceptance, but that we just think it’s really cool to publicly question and dissect commonly held, traditional Christian beliefs.
It’s getting so boring. It’s getting so predictable, and it’s so passe already. Especially when so much of mainline Christianity is publicly questioning and dissecting commonly held, traditional Christian beliefs.
How is my face supposed to look when someone talks about how wonderful the war on terror is? Just for future reference.
Civil? Welcoming of the stranger? Hospitable?
Just off the top of my head.
“the faces close”
I’m just saying that my face might close a bit if someone expressed “warm enthusiasm” (I mean “warm enthusiasm”, like you were talking about a puppy or favorite poem) about the war on terror. Does that make me uncivil or unhospitable? Do I get to say in a respectful manner that I think he or she is quite wrong, or would that be lacking in welcome?
What are the lines of intolerance?
I still remember my first Sunday at a UU congregation. My wife and I were walking around looking at all the different info tables. One of the tables had info about an upcoming election and voter registration forms. I turned to my wife and said, “Well, I guess we need to get around to registering to vote and figuring out who the local candidates are.”
The woman at the table twisted into a look of abject shock. “You don’t know who your local officials are??” She was very disappointed with us.
We had just moved to town three months prior.
Really, Jason, is it that hard to know what’s welcoming and what’s not?
“Really, Jason, is it that hard to know what’s welcoming and what’s not?”
No, it isn’t that hard, and as a representative of my church would like to believe I am very welcoming and open, even to those who I have philosophical disagreements with.
I was just a bit rankled by the rant. It is easy to point and say, “look these hypothetical people are being unwelcoming and intolerant” and much harder to effect real change towards making us more open and welcoming. When I read that I didn’t know the flag questioner, or the war supporter, or the Wal-Mart shopper, and I am to assume that they are the injured parties here. But there is no context. Yes in your real-life example, that was rude, and she could have handled that better. But was it because she was intolerant? Was she having a bad day? Did you have pleasant and positive experiences with her later?
Sometimes we screw up. We are dreadfully human after all, but do these instances point to a great trend of idealogical intolerance within UU? I don’t know.
I was just a bit rankled by the rant.
Hey, not my rant. Go talk to Peacebang. ;-)
But there is no context. Yes in your real-life example, that was rude, and she could have handled that better. But was it because she was intolerant? Was she having a bad day? Did you have pleasant and positive experiences with her later?
Exactly. No context for me and my wife because we were first time visitors. She had the power in this situation (as a church member, as someone entrusted with a table, as someone who knew where the bathrooms were, etc.), and she misused it, however intentionally or unintentionally. If I wasn’t a seminary graduate who knew church folk could be “like that,” we wouldn’t have come back. We definitely felt judged.
And as guests in that church, it was not our responsibility to find out if she was having a bad day or whatever. It was her responsibility to be welcoming to us. And, as you said, she was rude. She failed in her responsibility to be welcoming of the stranger.
As to whether this is a trend or not, you’d need to ask first time visitors to UU groups and UU folks who don’t quite fit the usual UU mold (like in Peacebang’s examples).
But at a UU party last night, I noticed askance glances when someone put on a fur coat (which was a family heirloom). That persons’ date (who was new to the group) definitely noticed and felt awkward. There was at least one other moment like that that I happened to notice, and we as a group try to be especially welcoming to new folks. (I’m quite proud of our little group for that.) If we’re doing it while trying to be welcoming, wouldn’t it be worse among UUs who aren’t trying?
Another example.
One of my favorite people at church is a seven-foot-tall truck driver. He acts, talks, and looks like a truck driver. His politics are on the libertarian side, and, if asked, he will tell you what he thinks about current issues.
I’ve been approached by a prominent church leader who asked me if I thought he was “safe.” Someone had had a heated (but respectful) discussion of Iraq with my tall friend, and told this church leader that he was now scared of him.
To this son of a barber and daycare worker, that is ideological intolerance, and there’s probably some classism in there to boot.
Trend or no? You tell me.
There are some people in the world who always seem to know the right thing to say. I often wonder where they learned what was the right thing to say, because no one ever taught me. I sure wish someone had.
About the people who are in the minority on political opinions — we respect people. We have no obligation to respect ideas. There are bad ideas.
About the people who are in the minority on political opinions — we respect people. We have no obligation to respect ideas. There are bad ideas.
So love the sinner but hate the sin?
Well, Chutney, sort of. Ones opinions are definitely changable and voluntary — you can change your opinions. And I did say respect the person. In my experience, the people who say “love the sinner but hate the sin”, actually use the sin as an excuse to show hate to the sinner. Do you agree that i can politely and respectfully disagree with someone’s opinions at church?
When we had a controversy at our church, I took the time to ask a couple of the minority-opinion folks whether they felt they were being respected and heard. They said they did. On the other hand, their daughter-in-law quit the church over the issue. Not, however, because whe wasn’t respected, but because she didn’t respect us: she felt we had no right to even discuss the issue. I disagree with that. Why shouldn’t we discuss anything?
Kim, I think we’re basically on the same page here. The only exception I’d take is that I think welcoming the newcomer is a greater responsibility even than respecting those whose opinions we disagree with.
It’s sad when Unitarians reveal “sacred cows,” like in your story. Sounds exactly what Peacebang was talking about.
I agree that welcoming the newcomer is very important. When we travel, we often go to the local UU church wherever we are. Our welcome as newcomers has run the gamut. As a lifelong UU, if we feel unwelcome, I feel free (or obligated) to find someone on the Board and tell them so. I figure they need the feedback. (I also tell them when we feel welcome.)
However, in my story above, no one was a newcomer. The Republican couple I asked have been members for about 50 years, and their daughter-in-law, I don’t know how long, but was there before I came in the early 1990s. Our congregation has more conservatives than any Western congregation I’ve been to.
As I said, I felt like I wasn’t getting any respect from them (the couple of people who took this position) when they told us we shouldn’t even discuss the issue let alone vote on it, and then wouldn’t show up for the discussion to give their side of the issue — like they were pre-judging that we wouldn’t respect their opinion without even giving us a chance. Then the ones who did show up for the discussion said yes they felt we respected them and their dissenting opinion.
Worse than all this though, I recently heard a story from one of our members that shocked me and made my blood boil. She took over organizing a project we had voted in (the Rochester model), though it had not been her suggestion. Then people started attacking her for what she was doing and for the nature of the project. Apparently several people phoned her at home to complain about various things — and all she was doing was trying to keep everything organized (and doing a great job, by the way.) She said she got more complaints than appreciation! She hasn’t been coming to church lately….
OMG i am so glad i found this blog. My boyfriend and I attended a UU church last year and it seemed cool at first, but after awhile we noticed that some people there would hardly talk to us or would interrupt us when we would speak. One lady thought it was a sin against nature to not like wine, and another thought it was the same when it came to sci-fi/fantasy interests. He went to this get-together at one of the member’s homes, and he said he was ignored or treated like an unwelcome guest. After that, we stopped going.
Nikki, I’m sorry to hear that. And I hope it wasn’t my congregation!
But it’s true that we can be too snotty and too geeky for our own good. I’m hoping you just ran into some bad conversationalists though. Maybe give it another shot?