Some liberties have been taken with format, but not content, except that contact information has been removed.
Subject: I stand alone without beliefs
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:03:11 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
Kathy's Song
I hear the drizzle of the rain
Like the memory it falls
Soft and warm continuing
Tapping on my roof and walls
And from the shelter of my mind
Through the window of my eyes
I gaze beyond the rain drenched streets
To a land where my heart lies
My mind's distracted and diffused
My thoughts are many miles away
They lie with you when you're asleep
Kiss you when you start your day
A song I was writing's left undone
I don't know why I spend my time
Writing songs I can't believe
With words that tear and strain to rhyme
And so you see I have come to doubt
All that I once held as true
I stand alone without beliefs
The only truth I know is you
And as I watch the drops of rain
Weave their weary paths and die
I know that I am like the rain
There before the grace of you go I
Simon and Garfunkel
Subject: FW: thanks
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 23:19:19 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: "Birds of a Feather", "UUCF Chat"
-----Original Message-----
From: [Kit Lueder]
Sent: Sunday, 21 January, 2001 21:32 [probably -0500]
To: [Alex Machina]
Cc: [Donna Machina]
Subject: thanks
Hi Alex,
Thanks for trashing on Jim Nelson today during the Sunday church service. I really appreciate your negativity. The way you did it on behalf of other people, like it wasn't really your doing--very cool. And that you will continue to participate in the community as a non-member, so this garbage never ends.
Wonderful,
Kit Lueder.
Subject: A Spiritual Vacuum
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 02:07:50 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: [unknown]
CC: "Birds of a Feather", "UUCF Chat"
I thought that with effort and persistence, it might be possible for the UUCF leadership in general, and Jim Nelson in particular, to arrive at a place where the words spoken from the pulpit, would be consistent with behavior.
However, I reluctantly conclude that such is not the case. The Unitarian Universalist Church of Fairfax is now dominated by a leadership clique that has neither interest in nor understanding of the concerns of a significant portion of the congregation. All attempts at mediation or compromise have been met with, at best, an attitude of neglect, and more recently, proactive and outspoken derision.
The source of this behavior, in my view, is Rev. Jim Nelson. He has neither the interest nor compassion to be a minister who brings people together. In fact, in my view, his very actions promote, exacerbate and incite division among the congregants of UUCF. I think his words are superb and flowery. But I view his behavior as demeaning, small, inconsiderate and anything but ministerial. He has an authoritative streak and I feel that his own intolerant and single-minded search for meaning renders him incapable of ministering to many of those around him.
I am not sure that UUCF can ever return to the roots and ideals I saw years ago, which motivated me to become a member after several years of attendance as a friend. Democracy and the ability to listen to one another, to love one another, to respectfully disagree with one another, and yet include each other as family, has been systematically and inexorably stripped from the soul of this church. Since I became a member, almost 100 people that I know of have left this church for reasons related to my concerns in this letter. Many more continue to participate with diminished hope. They have been replaced by many who are not aware of nor concerned with the radical changes that have torn this congregation's spirit.
Accordingly, since I see no hope for change, compromise or respectful co-existence, I am today resigning my membership at the Unitarian Church of Fairfax. For me, this sanctuary has become a spiritual vacuum, dominated by empty rhetoric, inane jokes, staged productions and incessant appeals for money.
--
Alex
Subject: Re: A Spiritual Vacuum
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:56:42 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather
Alex,
I humbly invite you to UUs of Sterling.
Here is their website that Gary updates every week for your enjoyment. We would welcome you.
Alisa
Subject: Re: healing
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:31:17 EST
From: [Janice Holmblad]
To: "Birds of a Feather"
Alex,
My 13 year old son and his class were present at the 11:00 service during your diatribe. He was very confused by what you had to say and recognized it for the inappropriate behavior it was. I do appreciate being able to have an opportunity to discuss with him how we deal with disagreements within our church, but I am disappointed that my son and the rest of the congregation had to listen to your mean-spirited, hate-filled insults directed at our minister.
I also (as are Hal Fuller and Kit Lueder) am a member of the leadership of this Congregation and as with any large organization (or family) there are disputes and different ways of resolving them . I have always found that I get out of things at least as much as I put in. I have been challenged and found love and support, including during very dark times. I have been spiritually up-lifted by sermons, music, teaching and getting to know the young people of our church, and especially during shared moments with people who have shown me love. I look out from the choir during the second service and see your hostile expression as you look around. It is not only directed at Jim, I feel it directed at me and everyone else present. It is impossible to receive anything spriritual or loving when you have closed yourself off in the way you have so clearly closed yourself off. I have been very distressed by the intensity of your hatred as I have waited to sing during the second service. You are getting back what you are putting in. I am not sorry you are leaving UUCF. You are no longer the person I thought I knew, although I now realize I couldn't have known you. I have not seen you make any serious attempt to make an improvement in life at UUCF during the past 6 months.What I have observed is that you have tried to undermine what is positive and harm our Minister and Congregation. You don't have a right to do that.
Janice
Subject: Re: A Spiritual Vacuum
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 15:25:42 -0500
From: "Laura Sheridan"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
Dear Alex,
I may not agree with all of what you said, but to me your words were temperate, eloquent, and thought-provoking and will cause me to pay more attention to what goes on in the church. I do hope you continue to participate in the UUCF community.
Laura
[ "A Spiritual Vacuum", by Alex Machina 22 Jan 2001is quoted in full here.]
Subject: RE: healing
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:23:32 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
[ "Re: Healing", by Janice Holmblad, 22 Jan 2001 is quoted in full here.]
Janice,
I urge you to post your reply to me on UUCF Chat as well. I think it is important that all members, not just those on the Birds list, be aware of differing views.
I very much agree with you, that I am not the person you thought you knew. In fact, I don't think you know me at all.
Alex
Subject: Re: healing
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:35:24 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather
This is not healing. To heal, one must feel for the other, be aware of the other's pain. One must be willing to listen. One must bind up the other's wounds, not help to inflict more pain by lashing out as well.
Alex was in pain, and no one listened. Finally, he did what he felt was right. Joys and Sorrows was once known as Joys and Concerns. It was changed because no one wanted to hear what was of "concern" because what was often spoken about others did not see it as a concern, but as an attack. Often what was voiced in Joys and Concerns were Social Justice Issues that needed to be made aware of. Announcements just was not enough to say what was needed to be said. That voice has been silenced.
If Alex, however, cannot be allowed to voice what he felt was a GREAT SORROW than soon no one will be permitted to share even that. To think, if no one was allowed to share their sorrow, then what about joy? Will that also not be allowed? OR what if the congregation was ONLY allowed to voice trivial joys and sorrows, i.e., someone's birthday or someone's death. Important to be sure, but because no one wishes to really listen to the tough stuff, what seems important is reduced to the trivial. Is this the mind of a free-liberal religious church? Where NO ONE is allowed to speak from their own heart?
Alex has some very deep feeling for the congregation. It must have pained him greatly to say what he did, but is Alex wrong in saying what he said? No, he said what was in his heart. EVERY STORY MATTERS, no matter what that story may be or where it comes from.
Alex has been judged to be mean-spirited, hate-filled. Someone else used those words once for me. No one can truly know what is within the heart of another unless they have walked a thousand miles in their shoes. Someone once said, "A thousand miles begins with a single step." I am willing to walk with Alex. Are you willing to walk with us?
Crane
To the ordinary being, others often require tolerance. To the highly evolved being, there is no such thing as tolerance, because there is no such thing as other.
Subject: A man hears what he wants to hear...
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:25:44 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
The Boxer
I am just a poor boy
though my story's seldom told
I have squandered my resistance
for a pocketful of mumbles
such are promises
All lies in jest
still a man hears
what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest
When I left my home
and my family
I was no more than a boy
in the company of strangers
in the quiet of the railway station
running scared
Laying low
seeking out the poor quarters
where the ragged people go
looking for the places
only they would know
Asking only workman's wages
I come looking for a job
but I get no offers
just a come on from the whore zone
seventh avenue
I do declare
there were times when I was so lonesome
I took some comfort there
When I'm laying out my winter clothes
and wishing I was home
going home
where the New York city winters
are in need of me
needing me
going home
In the clearing stands a boxer
and a fighter by his dream
and he carries the reminders
of every glove that laid him down
or cut him 'til he cried out
in his anger and his shame
I am leaving, I am leaving
but the fighter still remains
Simon and Garfunkel
-- Alex
Subject: Re: healing
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:34:28 EST
From: [Maicla Helme]
To: [Birds of a Feather]
Alisa,
Well put. More and more I find you articulate what I was trying to express but didn't.
I just don't understand why some members of uucf (who I once thought were my friends) have to attack and insult anyone who disagrees or finds fault with the uucf leadership. Certainly they don't think the leadership is perfect, do they?
So far I've received 2 emails complaining about Alex's choices of expression. In those emails the following phrases have described Alex and his ideas.
On the other hand, Alex's message, to whom these emails object, contains, at worst, the following phrases,
Am I the only one who sees the discontinuity here? According to some of the uucf leadership, anyone who criticizes the uucf leadership is "hate-filled" and spouting "garbage." These accusations are false.
I would agree that there is mean spiritedness, hate, and closing themselves off; but it is not coming from Alex's email; it is not coming from the petitioners who requested a mediator; and it is not coming from those who call attention to the statistics showing uucf's decline. It is coming from the very people who use those terms to describe others.
goldfinch
Subject: Re: healing-We Are One
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:19:53 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather
As I sent off my email, I realized I had more to say. First of all, how many of you have seen "Simbah's Pride?" It was never released in theaters. It was released soley on video. I am an advent admirer of Disney Animation. If none of you have noticed, the later animated films have as part of their story line lessons that we all must learn. Children may pick up on these lessons quicker than the adults, but if you listen carefully, they can remind us what is important in this world. The lesson that was being imparted in Simbah's Pride was WE ARE ONE.
In the story, Kirara, Simbah's daughter falls in love with a male lion called Kovu who was raised by his mother Zera in another pride (that had been outcasted) to kill Simbah. Kovu, however betrays his own pride and does not kill Simbah, but Simbah is led to believe that Kovu was part of the plot. So Simbah banishes him. Kirara leaves her pride to find Kovu, and when she does as they both look within the waters of a pond, their faces appear to merge, seeing one half hers and one half his. In seeing this, Kirara understood her father's words, WE ARE ONE. Kovu and Kirara raise back to their prides to try to prevent a war. They help the others to see that they were ALL LIONS and therefore the same. But Zera was so bent on her hate of Simbah, she ended destroying herself in the end, despite the fact that even Kirara tried to help her.
The lesson in this story is one that we all should listen to carefully. We may not always agree with each other. We may even be on opposing sides, but we are the same. We are human and WE ARE ONE.
Let's not let opposing views destroy how we feel toward one another, but realize we all have feelings, the same feelings, anger, sadness, joy, the whole range. We would not be human if we did not. WE ARE ONE.
Crane
Subject: Re: healing-We Are One
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 06:42:31 EST
From: [Janice Holmblad]
To: [Birds of a Feather]
Dear Crane,
I agree with your sentiments, but how is that reflected in going on the attack during "joys and sorrows" or "joys and concerns". Expressing how one feels is very different from attacking. I know there have been timesin my life when I have been extremely angry and hurt and have lashed out in frustration, but in the process I have pushed away those who might bhave been able to hear me. Everyone needs to find a way to hear. We also need to find ways to speak so we can be heard. We each need to open ourselves to others. I admit that I said some harsh things in my email, it is very difficult to offer solace or support to someone who is glaring at you. I would sit and wonder what I had done to hurt Alex. All I have come up with is that because I agreed to be a Lay Minister and have not attacked Jim I am one of those who will not listen.
I am glad there are others who are able to offer comfort. I have found great support within the UUCF community, including from our ministers. This is what having a spiritual home means to me. It has been in reaching out that I have been touched.
Janice
Subject: Re: healing
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 07:37:46 EST
From: [Janice Holmblad]
To: [Birds of a Feather]
Alex,
I don't think it is helpful to use the UUCF chat list in that way. Just as I don't think it is appropriate to use the Joys and Sorrows to lash out at individuals. There is no perspective provided. In fact, when you first asked me to sign on to Birds of a Feather I sent a return email asking you what it was about, because I didn't know. You didn't respond to me and I have found myself in the middle of what seems like a long standing feud. It has become clear that my experience at UUCF has been very different from yours. I can't help that. I cannot go inside your head to get an understanding of you, I can only base it on what I hear and observe. From the beginning of being on this list, when I have seen you at church you have made yourself unapproachable. I am sorry you have closed yourself off in this way. I thought by reading what was expressed here I might get insight.
WIthin the first days I read a comment about Jim not being at a lay-led service, as though that is some kind of major offence. I don't think it is necessary for him to attend every function, he has other commitments, professional and family. The focus on what the numbers are without doing an objective study of the reasons behind the apparent decline can lead to self-serving interpretations. Others could say that the decline has been because of a small group of people who have attacked the leadership and those who have left feel uncomfortable with the conflict. I have heard that from former members, but I wouldn't presume to use that anecdotal information as an explanation for the change in numbers.
We learn more about each other by working together and you and I have never had that opportunity. When I have worked closely with other church members, even when I have disagreed with them, I have come to a better understanding of them and I have treasured that deeper understanding.
We are a large congregation. It can be easier to avoid getting actively involved because of that. Being involved I have become aware of the largeness and how challenging it is to connect and to accomplish all there is to accomplish. I know you have been very involved in UUCF. In spite of that we haven't had the opportunity to work on anything together. That is one of the unfortunate realities of a large church. It is also one of the wonders, when we "discover" a "new" person who has been a member as long as we have, and we connect. When we try out a new area we find a new person and find out something new about ourselves.
I approached "birds of a feather" that way. I have read beautiful poems and prose. There are many wonderful thoughts expressed. Those who have gone on to other congregations are bringing parts of UUCF when they bring themselves. Those who are staying are embarking on a new phase of growth. I am staying because it is my spiritual home.
Janice
Subject: Healing our Community
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 07:56:15 EST
From: [Tony DeCamp]
To: Birds Of A Feather
Some years back, when I was "between marriages", I told a counselor that I was seeing about how bad I was feeling, and how difficult it was for me to express exactly how I felt. His response was that I needed to realize that feelings were neither good nor bad; they "just were". He said that I should listen to my feelings, instead of using them as a basis for complaining.
I didn't fully understand this until I had spent several years in our church's Adult Children of Alcoholics (ACOA) group. Among the principles that we followed were that we should listen to others, not judge them, and that we didn't have to try to fix the problems that other members had. In this group, we closed every meeting with the words "Take what you want, and leave the rest", meaning that what we had heard that evening might be of value to us, but didn't have to be.
Unfortunately, I was not present Sunday to hear Alex's words at "Joys and Sorrows". If I had known his feelings better, I would have been there to support him in a difficult time. I have spoken with him since. I believe his words were an effort to express the deep hurt that he has experienced at UUCF. It makes no difference whether this hurt derived directly from his personal experiences, or indirectly from seeing his friends hurt, and empathizing with them. Both are still hurts.
When one expresses a feeling of being hurt, there is one, AND ONLY ONE, helpful response. That is affirming the validity of his/her feelings. You don't have to agree with them. You don't have to believe that they are right or justified. You just have to affirm the person by saying that you understand him/her.
When I express a feeling, and the person I am talking to discounts the feeling, I simply feel angrier than before. I am not angry at the other person, but at myself for spending the time looking for affirmation from one who cannot give me what I need. What discounts my feeling? Statements such as: "You shouldn't feel that way." "Don't be so hostile." "Why don't you look for the good side?"
Over the past few years, I have heard an increasing number of statements such as these from one member of UUCF spoken about another. I have heard statements like this from the pulpit, and in our newsletter. Perhaps there was even a similar flavor in what Alex said.
Whatever the words used, Alex expressed some hurt. The compassionate community that Jim has said he wants to build would affirm the expression of such a hurt, instead of attacking the speaker.
No one is perfect -- not me, not you, and not our minister or anyone in our leadership. We are all capable of choosing our words poorly, and hurting someone. When that happens, the compassionate person will have the courage to say "I'm sorry", and make amends to the person he/she hurt. The compassionate observer will sympathize and affirm the feelings of the person who is hurting without necessarily agreeing with every fact about the cause of the hurt.
I ask all members of UUCF to look carefully at the back of our Order of Service next Sunday, and read the seven principles that we have, as a congregation, pledged to live by. As you do so, ask yourself what those call on you to do with regard to the words that Alex used, and the feelings that he expressed.
In peace, love, and spiritual growth toward community,
Tony DeCamp
Subject: Re: healing-We Are One
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:51:52 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather
As always a misinterpretation is in ordeer here. I did NOT attack Joys and Sorrows, I merely pointed out how Joys and Concerns changed to become Joys and Sorrows. Perhaps you were not a member then. Joys and Concerns was a time where people could voice not only the joy, but deep concern or fears such as Alex's. Someone decided that was no longer appropriate and decided that those issues could be entered into a book. But who reads that book to know? Do you? I am not only asking you, Janice, I am asking ALL members. I read that book once, and I could not believe the amount of hurt that had been expressed there because people were not allowed to express it in church. All those people wanted was to have their feeling acknowledged and to be held in our comfort, to have someone say to them, I am sorry that you are hurting. Perhaps we can work through it and find a solution together. But people continue to react first with anger and accusations.
First of all, Alex was not angry at you, but at the Minister. He has every right to be angry at Jim just as much as you have every right not to, but the specific issue is not Jim, the leadership, Akex, me or you. The issue is that someone is HURT. We must identify what has caused that hurt, whether they be words used that were not intended or whether that person had intended to be devisive, to make deliberate cutting remarks designed to hurt. We must recognize that the words we say HURT others. If it was not our intention and a person strikes out and attacks, we must realize first that is going to be their first reaction, "a knee jerk" reaction if you will, filled with anger and hurt. When we realize this, we can say to the person, it was not my intention to cause such a reaction. I am sorry if my words hurt you. But NO ONE has recognized that fact. One person says something and it is interperted by another as devisive. That second person reacts with anger. A third then comes in to defend the first , also with anger, then a fourth comes in to defend the second, and so forth until there is a split among a group of good people where they have forgotten the reason why they are fighting in the first place.
It is obvious to me that the words spoken by the first had caused the division, even though those words WERE NOT INTENDED TO SO. If the first would have realized this, the first could have remedied the situation and told what that intention really was, perhaps to use such words as an example, but because HOW those words were spoken, pain insued.
It is NOT my intention to cause more pain, but to point out that pain continues to be caused on BOTH sides. I have had time to think and to "listen" to the "arguments". There is no " You are wrong and I am right" answer here. When that happens, polarization takes place. The INTENT is what matters. What we intend will effect others and ourselves. Did the Minister intend to hurt members of his congregation by his words? I do not know. But that is the reaction that his words had. Does he realize this? Again, I do not know. If he does, than it is up to him to set the record straight and say that was NOT his intention and humbly apologize to those he may have hurt inadvertantly. But if he does not and believes that his words are true, we must also think on that matter and decide what we must do.
I am not attacking the Minister. It is NOT my intention. I am merely pointing out the thought process that we all must go through to understand one another better. To have us think carefully on not only our words, but our INTENT. I hope I have cleared up any confusion.
Crane
Subject: Re: healing-We Are One
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 19:25:41 -0500
From: "Marcia Vernor"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
Alisa,
Thank you for expressing your feelings about Alex. You are very eloquent in your explanations. I appreciate how you express them and it is how I also feel. I believe Alex did the right thing. Many people have asked me why did he express his feelings in church. I have tried to explain but they didn't understand.
If no one listens to you in what they call the appropriate way of expressing your feelings about anything, then where else can you express it so that people can get at least a glimpse of what you are feeling.
Alex I hope to continue to see you in many activities at UUCF. You are a wonderful person who deserves more respect for your feelings.
Sincerely,
Marcia
Subject: Re: healing
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:50:47 -0500
From: "Dick Byrd"
To: "Birds of a Feather"
I have to cast my vote with Marcia's view expressed to Alisa. The intemperate and insultiing comments were from Alex's detractors, not from Alex. However, I did not hear what was said by Alex in public last Sunday, so this lack of knowledge on my part must in all honesty be considered in my comment.
Dick
[ "Re: healing", by Marcia Helme, 24 Jan 2001 is quoted in full here.]
Subject: RE: FW: thanks
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 00:51:33 -0500
From: "Alex Machina"
To: "Hal Fuller"
CC: [Birds of a Feather], [UUCF Chat], [numerous others]
Hal,
Thank you so much for your message and your acknowledgment of my feelings and views. I appreciate that you have taken the time and effort to explain your point of view to me. However, I feel I must respond to you, because I think we are talking about entirely different things.
>Alex:
>
>I think you totally misread the organizational structure of UUCF and the
>nature of those who currently occupy its leadership positions if you see
>it as as monolithic, or as dominated by any single individual. I can
>assure you that such is not the case. Those of us who are (temporarily)
>in "leadership" positions have strong disagreements among ourselves about
>everything from theology to programs to service format to finances. What
>we do seem to have in common is (1) civility--at least most of the time;
>and (2) a willingness to abide by the democratic process. I wish the
>same could be said for everyone who participates in congregational life,
>whether as a member or a friend.
Regarding UUCF, I said:
[...] The Unitarian Universalist Church of Fairfax is now dominated by a leadership clique that has neither interest in nor understanding of the concerns of a significant portion of the congregation. All attempts at mediation or compromise have been met with, at best, an attitude of neglect, and more recently, proactive and outspoken derision.
I am not talking about civility or the willingness to abide by the democratic process. I am talking about a deeper understanding of and a greater nurturing of those who have issues and concerns with being included at UUCF. I am talking about being listened to. I am talking about being affirmed in our chosen spiritual community.
> As one who has been involved with the congregation for almost 30 years,
>I can assure you that our recent consultants (who, incidently, did not
>talk to me) were right on the money when they wrote that we are a
>conflicted congregation. Always have been, under at least 5 different
>ministers during my time, and likely will continue to be for the
>indefinite future. Maybe it says something about the nature of people
>who are attracted to UU ism. I believe that many of us, myself
>included, are conflicted internally. Maybe we have to learn to deal with
>that conflict before we can expect more from our church or our ministers.
>
I do not disagree with you here. I'm not sure, however, how it addresses my concerns. I don't think I understand where you want me to go with that.
>
>You say you can name about 20 percent of the congregation who have left
>under the current minister. Begging your indulgence, and despite my
>flagging memory, I suspect I could name a similar percentage who departed
>under every one of his predecessors, citing similar disappointments.
>
>A fact of life: ministers attract a certain following, people who tend
>to think like they do and who have a similar world vision, or who have
>certain needs that that particular minister seem able to satisfy. Jim
>does. Ralph did. Ralph's predecessor did.
>
>When the minister who attracted us to the congregation leaves, and is
>replaced by someone else, disappointment is almost inevitiable for many.
>Either they are disappointed in their role model for having abandoned
>them; or they are disappointed in their role model's successor for not
>being more like the minister they replaced; or they are disappointed in
>the congregation for not having remained true to the former minister. I
>can't ever recall a parishioner expressing disappointment in themselves
>for harboring unrealistic expectations.
>
>Some adjust and stay. Some don't and leave. Others can't make up their
>minds, so they remain and inflict their dissatisfaction on others.
>Somehow the congregation has managed to survive for 45 years despite all
>its conflict. I expect it will continue to survive despite your
>resignation.
Well, you are certainly expressing, in the above four paragraphs, a pragmatic view of what occurs within organizations, and I agree with your assessment.
But I think you and I have a different world view. A church, or, for me, a community, such as UUCF, is more than just an organization, in which we as members "adjust and stay" or "don't and leave" or "remain and inflict [...] dissatisfaction". We are not a political party or a corporate entity or a neighborhood association. We are a group of people who voluntarily associated ourselves with something that touched our mind and spirit. To say to those of our community who are disaffected that they should "adjust and stay" or "don't and leave" is not something that I hold as a world view for a church community. It is that conflict in our world views that has finally led to this schism.
You see, what I am asking Jim to do, and the leadership of UUCF to do, is to recognize that Jim's way of relating to the community at large, is not inclusive; to recognize that Jim and the leadership, so far, have supported a world view in which only majority sentiments are nurtured. But even more than that, to recognize that minority sentiments are not only not nurtured, but that the response to disaffection has been a proactive attempt to silence or disperse those who are dissatisfied.
I will give only one example, and I hope you do not consider it either illustrative or significant in the scheme of things. It is just one example. I can give more. Many others can give theirs. It is not my intent that Jim respond to this one in particular. It is only my intent to use it as an illustration of what I perceive to be a general way of relating to the congregation.
A few months ago, Jim changed the opening words from "and as sound enters a room, so let us now enter this hour of worship" (followed by the bell) to the current "Thou art the [....] Thou art the [...] Thou art the [...]" (followed by the bell).
Now, I will admit to you these particular opening remarks make me crazy. But I am not asking that Jim not use them. I am only asking that once in awhile, sometimes, just for those of us who are made crazy by this stuff (yes, just because; for no other reason, but because he cares enough), that Jim use something, anything, different, just to affirm those of us who view the world differently, to include those of us who are made crazy by this stuff.
>
>Personally, I thought your actions on Sunday reflected more of what is
>going on inside of you than what is happening with the congregational
>leadership. It is clear that you are suffering. I hope you find solace
>somewhere. I doubt if it will be at UUCF. At least not now. I wish you
>the best.
>
Well, I will not deny that my actions on Sunday reflected what is going on inside of me. On the other hand, I hope that you affirm that in my chosen spiritual community, I can have a moment in the service, which I consider sacred, that is entirely mine, to share with the congregation what I have to share. And that if what I share is critical of the church or the leadership, that even though it certainly reflects my state of mind, I still have the right to share it, just as Jim has the right to say whatever he says from the pulpit. That is how I understood "Joys and Concerns" (which, by the way, was unilaterally changed by Jim to "Joys and Sorrows"). That is how I understand the words "And may all of our joys, and all of our sorrows, both those spoken and unspoken, be held in the loving arms of this community."
You see, Hal, you are absolutely right when you say "ministers attract a certain following, people who tend to think like they do and who have a similar world vision".
I am saying I do not share Jim's vision, nor the vision of those who are attracted to his ministerial style. I view Jim's vision as a version of "love it or leave it".
During the informational meeting last Sunday, Tony DeCamp was interrupted by Kurt Jensen and told to "ask a question, Tony" when he attempted to inform the membership of his views and feelings. Similarly, Nancy Byrd was interrupted by Kurt Jensen and told to "ask a question, Nancy" when she attempted to inform the membership of her views and feelings. The world view of the leadership of UUCF is certainly one that values democracy. I admit that I am a member of a minority (but a significant one, comprising at least 20% of the congregation). But it is not a world view that enfolds me, that accepts me, that affirms me, even in disagreement. And while I wish I did not have to resign, I see no alternative.
Thank you again for your letter, for your calm and reasoned words, for your best wishes for me in my search.
Alex
Subject: Re: FW: thanks
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:08:58 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather
[A spelling error was corrected with the
author's permission.]
Alex,
Thank you for your deep hearted and logical explanation. Your INTENT was VERY clear. It is MY wish that all could be so clear. INTENT is clearly an important part of what we say and mean. Without it, confusion reins and misunderstandings happen. World views often become clouded. Our INTENT MUST be clear in order so those lstening can also understand. Let hope that clarity will come to others.
Lao Tzu stated:
This is the nature of the unenlightened mind:
The sense organs, which are limited in scope and ability, randomly gather information. This partial information is arranged into judgements, which are based on previous judgements, which are usually based on someone else's foolish ideas. These false concepts and ideas are then stored in a highly selective memory system.
Distortion upon distortion: the mental energy flows constantly through contorted and inappropriate channels, and the more one uses the mind, the more confused one becomes.
To eliminate the vexation of the mind, it doesn't help to DO something, this only reinforces the mind's mechanics. Dissolving the mind is instead a matter of not-doing: Simply avoid becoming attached to what you see and think. Relinquish the notion that you are separated from the all-knowing mind of the universe. Then you can recover your original pure insight and see through all illusion. Knowing nothing, you will be aware of everything.
Remember: because clarity and enlightenment are within your own nature, they are regained without moving an inch.
Crane
Subject: Re: FW: thanks
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:22:59 -0500
From: "Judy Gallimore"
To: "Birds of a Feather", "Hal Fuller"
CC: [UUCF Chat], [numerous others]
Alex,
I was not in church last Sunday but have been reading the reactions and comments to your statement during "Joys and Concerns" on email. I found your reply to Hal Fuller very helpful to me in getting my head on straight about this. To be critical of a speaker during "Joys and Sorrows" is to be telling the speaker that they were misusing the venue. In other words, they are saying to the speaker that what they are expressing is not a joy or concern. That is up to the speaker to determine. I certainly wouldn't want someone to be judging the appropriateness of anything I would say during "Joy and Concerns". Where would it end?
You already know all this but I am going to try to write it out to further solidify my thoughts - and to express my support. If an opportunity is given for people to express sorrows and then all statements of sorrows and concerns (any concern can be so great that it causes sorrow) should be accepted as such. Words should not be censored, there should be no measure of what is appropriate. If a sorrow includes pain and anger and that pain and anger is articulated rather that violently acted upon then that is good. Just as it would be nice if all deaths were pleasant it would be nice if all words spoken during "Joys and Concerns" were of the generally acceptable kind. But, that's not the way life and death is.
"This is our communal prayer for each other."
Judy Gallimore
Subject: Re: [uucf-chat] Re: FW: thanks
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:18:35 -0500
From: "Billye Stevens"
To: "Birds of a Feather", "Hal Fuller", "Kit \(Christopher\) Lueder"
CC: "Jim Nelson", "Rev. Bill Welch", "Mary Binderman",
"Ernst & Harriet Meyer"
Judy Gallimore, Hal Fuller, Janice Holmblad and others,
Thank you for your e-mail input into Alex's statement made at Church. [I was not present. I do share some of his feelings.] Judy, your part in today's UUCF service moved me very much. Your com- passion to Sharon Babb, Gus, and their daughters showed me the best of caring. You drove from Falls Church to Herndon for Sharon. Your deeds are who you are. Hal, your tireless efforts in pursuit of social justice represents to me the best of leadership in this church. Janice, thanks for our conversation after the Super Bowl and for your leadership with the R. E.
What was the responseof the Ministry?
I call Donna and Alex Machina my friends. As new members of our community, they both came to a grounds committee meeting called by Zeena Zeidberg on a cold winter day years ago, ready to work. Alex set up the Birds of a Feather line to enable members of UUCF to express our thoughts without the guidelines/restrictions established in June 1998 for the UUCF Chat line. Alex's contributions of humor, philosophy, and information have been invaluable to me. He and Donna must love our members to invest so much energy here. They host the monthly foreign film night, also host many, many singles potluck/meetings, shop for food and help decorate the setting for the two Thanksgiving dinners at the church and offered their home for the dessert course both years. Donna teaches children of other parents and takes classes at night. Donna smiles at you when she talks.
Alex has brought things to me cheerfully when I have been ill, offered to get me for the foreign film night. He and Donna have driven me to singles meetings when I hesitate to venture at night in an area of which I am not familiar.
I have grown to love Donna and Alex. I am saddened that his expression of any pain he feels and expressed seems hostile to some of you. Knowing Alex, he must have been moved to open his heart, not an easy thing for a man.
Though it may be only your expression of some of your feelings toward the strong rift in UUCF, I perceive them as hostile to Alex. This should not be in a church community that calls itself a healing congregation that wants to "transform the world".
Are we seeking to acknowledge and heal the break in our own UUCF? I feel the tension so strongly that I have asked to be a friend of this congregation which I have loved and in which I have worked for years. This is not easy for me, for others who are changing affiliation with the church, and must be baffling to the new members and our youth. We are just humans.
I intend my words to offend no one. They are offered with hope for our community.
Billye Stevens
[ "Re: FW: thanks", by Judy Gallimore, 26 Jan 2001 is quoted in full here.]