Encouraging Signs, 15-20 Jan 2000

Poster's Note

Some liberty has been taken with format, but none with content.

Subject: Encouraging signs
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 10:30:22 -0800
From: Christine Mason
To: [UUCF Chat, Birds of a Feather]

Excerpts from message forwarded from [Anonomous-2]. [Anonomous-2] thank you. I hope everyone sees the following and thinks about how they can contribute to the type of communication suggested, realizing of course, that each of us has had different experiences and will be at different places--some more trusting than others. My belief is that if we continue to reaffirm the value of open communications and some of us try to open doors to communication that is loving, forward-thinking, and focused on building a better relationship, that we may help restore confidence and establish a new track record for resolving conflicts. I also believe that to do this, we need to participate in the opportunities to be a part of the solution and to be respectful of times that have been thoughtfully planned for discussion--realizing the hope and intent of ongoing dialogue.

In peace and love,

Chris Mason

[The following is the header from [Anonomous-2]'s letter as quoted in Chris's letter. [Anonomous-2]'s original letter is not included on this web page because it contains much material not related to the present theme.]

Subject: [Fwd: UUA Trustee Report - Dec. 1999]
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:09:32 -0500
From: "[Anonomous-2]"
To: UUCF Info List

[The following paragraph was partially modified by Chris.]

Forwarded by [Anonomous-2], Denominational Affairs UUCF--from sections highlighted by [Anonomous-2]

[The following paragraph was written by Chris, except that Mike Berger replaced "*" with "[bulleted]".]

I highly recommend the [bulleted] list of agreements following the underlined section about how the UUA Board hopes to work with each other, [Anonomous-2]

+++++

[The excerpt from [Anonomous-2]'s e-mail follows as it appeated in Chris's letter, except that Mike Berger restored [Anonomous-2]'s emphasis and replaced asterisks with bullets. [Anonomous-2]'s use of red was augmented with bold so it would be visible in monochrome prints.]

In October, I met with the UUA Board of Trustees in a Retreat for two days before we started our business. We took the time to talk about who we are, what is our work, how we could best do it, and considering leadership in the UU context. Many Unitarian Universalists are highly individualistic and internally referenced. Our history and a quick look at our principles makes this clear. Such people do not give up authority easily, if at all. We also reflect a cultural value of “being nice,” a trait that often covers conflict. With individualistic, internally referenced, conflict avoidant folks, leadership takes on special challenges, as does working together as a Board of Trustees. From these considerations and others about Learning Communities and good communication characteristics, we formulated a list of agreements about how we would work together. (If the two days of Board meeting that followed the retreat are any measure, we have put together a solid framework in which to pursue our work with passion, reasoned analysis, commitment to our highest values, compassion, and love.) Here are these promises we made to one another:

• We will stay in relationship even in disagreement or conflict.
  
  
• We will respect our communal meeting time, using it to advance the designated agenda.
  We will avoid repeating established points.
  We will be content to simply indicate support.
  
  
• We will treat each other with respect.
  We will make an effort to not interrupt and to respect the order of recognition to speak.
  We will actively listen to and respect the speaker who has the floor.
  We will minimize side comments.
  
  
• We will focus on policy issues, not management.
  
  
• We will work to find balance between good, inclusive process and closure on substantial matters.
  
  
• We will presume good faith.
  
  
• We will not re-do the work of the working groups and committees, and we will own that work.
  
  
• We will be honest and direct with each other.
  We will speak out when something is of serious concern.
  When we have a suspicion, concern or question, rather than make assumptions, we will ask questions.
  We will work on an issue directly with the person(s) with whom we have it, and we will support and encourage others to do the same.
  
  
• We will practice confession and forgiveness.
  
  
• We will attend to and manage the energy level and spiritual tenor of the meeting.
  

It is my hope that all the boards and groups that work in our JPD UU congregations will also take the time to discuss their understandings of how they want to work together, and will develop some explicit covenant that will sustain their work.

Subject: Re: Encouraging signs
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 18:02:14 EST
From: [Marcia Helme]
To: [Birds of a Feather]

Chris,

Thanks for passing this on. I think the advice is fine for a new organization in which people do not know each other and there is no history between them. However, I find it unhelpful to apply to an organization in which some people feel they have been repeatedly treated unfairly. Saying, "Let's start again with a blank page" is what abusers want their victims to do. The abusers can then minimize their responsibility for the problems in the relationship.

It's like saying, "Let's pretend there is not now and never has been an elephant in the living room." When the elephant is still very much there.

Goldfinch

Subject: Re: Encouraging signs
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 18:36:59 EST
From: [Shirley Gordon]
To: [Birds of a Feather]

Dear Marcia, Chris, and others,
                I agree fully with Marcia's viewpoints!
Shirley

Subject: Re: Distrust of Encouraging signs and other agendas
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:44:32 EST
From: [David Heagy]
To: [Birds of a Feather]

Marcia and Shirley, Who are the abusers?

What if the victims also were abusive?

What about the "innocent bystanders and new comers" who are affected?

I'm interested in your thoughts.        David

Subject: Re: Encouraging signs
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 14:57:38 EST
From: [Shirley Gordon]
To: [Birds of a Feather]

Dear David,

A quick reply to your message this AM. My first thoughts are that your questioning us as abusers is in the category of more denial of the situations that really exist at UUCF. In a previous comment of mine I stated that the numbers that have been affected negatively by Jim and board are well over 100 and climbing. If it were only a couple of "US" I'd certainly think differently. I'd then be taking a serious look at the "Complainers" as the cause... but THIS IS NOT THE CASE! At any case the situations need "Serious consideration."

As far as newcomers.... I believe that many of them will be eventually be effected by the "gut, renching" hurt in same way that a large number of others have been. I believe many of the newcomers will be effected completely independent of talking to any of US of have already experienced Hurts and sadness at UUCF.

I am off list for next several days as I attend a funeral for my Aunt who died this AM.

I do wish to add that I am grateful that you are out there listerning and responding.

Yours Shirley

In a message dated 01/15/2000 6:02:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, [Marcia Helme] writes:
[Marcia Helme, 15 Jan 2000 is quoted in full here.]

[Shirley Gordon, 15 Jan 2000 is quoted in full here.]
[David Heagy, 16 Jan 2000 is quoted in full here.]

Subject: Re: Other encouraging signs
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 17:08:00 -0800
From: Christine Mason
To: Birds of a Feather

Dear Shirley, Marcia, and other birds,

I hear you say that no repair is possible. I understand full well (from personal experience as well as volunteer work with many) how women who are abused often have no recourse but to leave, often leaving a violent man whom they still love.

However, my experience indicates that UUCF and Jim are not comparable to a battering situation. (This does not negate your experience; I can only speak of mine).

I have been at UUCF now for about 1 1/2 years. So I am a newcomer. I want free discourse, respect, intellectual and spiritual discussions and involvement. I can also appreciate the worship structure that exists right now at UUCF, even though I do not agree with everything about it. I still cringe each and every time we applaud in church and the more times we applaud during a service, the more I cringe. Now, I have expressed that opinion in several contexts and find that I am in a minority. That doesn't mean I will stop talking about my issue; however, I am not upset enough by this to stay away from church services and I find little value in making that my primary point of discussion. I still gain much, so I continue to be involved.

I believe that battering aside (and, yes, perhaps even in some cases of battering--although in that case I wouldn't recommend sticking around to find out) change is possible. I have come to understand that given your history at UUCF you will most likely not be the ones this time to reach out, to try to open doors. So, I'll try to take some of that on for me and for whomever it might benefit.

Throughout my life I have repeatedly seen the value of persistence, and the wisdom of timing, of influence from different sources. I know that sometimes it takes the 100th visit to make a difference. In my experience at UUCF I have experienced many opportunities to dialogue with the formal leadership (the Board, Bill, and Jim). I have no reason to believe--even though not all of my suggestions will be followed--that my discussions don't make a difference, or won't make a difference, sometime. Furthermore, I firmly believe that for myself, when I come from a place of love rather from my ego, doors tend to open wider and faster.

So, I choose to share hope with you. I respect wherever you are and realize that we will probably continue to disagree on this. I personally see no reason to focus on the negative, on the "what never will happen". I feel badly that you feel badly and I would love for it to be different. I'll do what I can because I choose to be involved. In the meantime, I appreciate the caring I see here-- Alisa's sharing of the Tao, Alex's philosophical and scientific gems, Nancy's concern for the environment, and the concern of many for gay rights, civil rights, and the spectrum of social justice. I also appreciate the opportunity to share ideas. so thank you all for making life richer.

In peace and love,
Chris Mason (Dreambird)

Subject: Re: Other encouraging signs
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 21:15:06 +0000
From: Alisa Joaquin
To: Birds of a Feather

Thank you Chris for your words. I have been studying the Tao now for about 1 1/2 years and it can be very insightful and enlightening. For those who may be interested in knowing more, especially the history, I would highly recommend the book:

The Shambhala Guide to Taoism by Eva Wong.

Each chapter also references other texts to learn more. What I found most insightful about the book was just how old Taoism goes back and its roots in Chinese Shamanism. There are many aspects to Taoism that many do not know about. Most are familiar with the Tao Te Ching, but there were many other texts that were written beyond that. Plus, I also learned that Tai Chi and Chi Gung were part of Taoist practices for health and longevity It is an interesting book and easy to read. It touches on many aspects and one can get a feel for the history of Taoism.

Crane

Subject: Re: Re: Distrust of Encouraging signs and other agendas
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:50:45 EST
From: [Marcia Helme]
To: [Birds of a Feather]

Dave,

In the past, Jim Nelson has abused many people who have since left the congregation. Many items were brought to the Board's attention via the Ombudsman's report. The Board's response was essentially a non-response. (Mike Berger's website has both the report and the Board's response. ) Jim has never acknowledged any wrongdoing on his part. The Board has never acknowledged any wrongdoing for failing to defend their fellow congregants (now former congregants).

Some general examples. (I can cite names, dates, and specifics, if you wish.)

1. I wrote a letter to the Board 2 or 3 years ago describing one of my many concerns. The Board never replied at all. The only response was that Jim Nelson called me up and said, "What are you talking about?" I gave him several more specific examples, and his response was something like, "Those people deserved it." I can send you a copy of the letter, if you wish.
   
   
2. Jim has, to my knowledge, used the bully pulpit on at least 3 occasions in the past 2 years.
   
   
3. When individual congregants, including Board members, have disagreed with Jim, he has called them in for a "meeting," which became Jim's tirade against the individual for being "unco-operative."
   
   
4. Whenever I have talked with Jim about any specific concern, his response has been one of the following. (I can provide specific examples, if you wish.)
   
   
   1. "It didn't happen that way."
      
      
   2. Rather than respond to the content of the message, he has objected to the personality of the messenger or to the messenger's delivery method (e.g., too long, too strident, too hostile).
      
      
   3. "That's a terrible thing to say about me."
      
      
   4. "I can't spend any more time on this."
      
      

Since these occurrences, there has been ample opportunity for Jim and the Board to apologize and make amends for their offensive behavior. However, Jim and the Board have chosen not to do so.

Goldfinch (Marcia)