This was taken from a single e-mail to uucf-chat sent by Ed Cacciapaglia on 11 Jul 1998. There have been some changes in format, but no change in content, except for the removal of e-mail boiler plate, automatic signatures, e-mail addresses, and the list subscription instructions.
The dialogue appears in reverse temporal order, as it was in the original e-mail.
Patricia,
I don't think your e-mail posted to the list because you are not a subscriber to either the chat list or the info list. To subscribe to the chat list, I believe you need to send an e-mail to
[Subscription instructions deleted.]
Happy e-mailing,
Ed
Dear Bob,
I couldn't agree LESS with your perceptions of Jim Nelson.
Instead of seeing Jim as having helped our congregation learn to SHARE MINISTRY, I see Jim as having sown seeds of division and alienation from the blessing of diversity and social action that we formerly enjoyed under Ralph.
I see Jim as trying to homogenize and control communication in our congregation. That does NOT empower others; that seeks to co-opt or meld them down one lane -- HIS.
And we pay him $80K to exert this corruption of our sacred Unitarian-Universalist path of questioning authority and promoting diversity?
I too have experienced other UU congregations and ministries:
| (1) | Dave Clark at Arlington UU - for 5 yrs. (I left after 1 year of Kim Beach, who bored and alienated me with what seemed like theoretical talks disconnected from real life and avenues of personal growth and social justice work. |
| (2) | David and Beverly Bumbaugh of Mt. Vernon UU - for 5 yrs. (they then left for Universalist ministry in Syracuse, NY) |
| (3) | Ralph Stutzman of FUC - for 10 yrs. |
| (4) | Jim Nelson of FUC/UUCF for 5 yrs. |
The guidance of the Bumbaughs and Stutzman encouraged and empowered me the most. I find Nelson small and cramping to my spirit -- and so have quite a few others, who finally felt compelled to speak up.
Perhaps to the annointed few like you, whom Jim has personally taken a special interest in, Jim has had an encouraging effect. But aside from so affecting his inner circle at UUCF, Jim has not been generous and encouraging -- quite the contrary.
As you can see, my perception of Jim is quite the reverse of yours.
Historically comparing our past and present membership count and growth of pledge levels seem to speak to this discouragement and downward turn at UUCF.
So, No, I do NOT see Jim as gifted in encouraging growth, either for most members personally or congregationally at UUCF.
Sincerely,
Patricia
Dear Patricia,
Thanks for sharing your perception. I'm not in a position of knowing whether Jim has similar feelings to the ones I've expressed - but I do know that he is disinclined to use the email list as a communication vehicle.
If I may suggest, I would like for those that are torn between "love for this congregation" and the need to find a more suitable "spiritual home" to seriously consider two factors that I firmly believe to be true of UUCF:
1. While any of you may find Jim wanting in some ministerial or personal dimension, you could be placing too much significance on the capacity of one individual to satisfy a wide spectrum of individual personality and life-positioned needs in this congregation. True, he is the senior minister - but he is also the person who has worked diligently and, I think (with pardonable modesty) effectively to make the concept (started by Ralph) of a Shared Ministry a reality. Beyond the more obvious extensions (Bill Welch, the Lay Ministers), Jim truly believes that the entire congregation has the capacity to minister to each other and is working to put the consciousness and resources in place for this to become even more of a reality. You might ponder whether a truly insecure person would enable and empower others to acquire the authority and responsibility inherent in a Shared Ministry.
2.Those of us who have been here in at least two ministries (and have been in other congregations) are able to see growth in Jim as a person and as a senior minister. The capacity to grow is more important than perfection - don't we want a "spiritual leader' who is more like us in that regard?
I expect that growth to continue, just as I hope it does in all of us. In our faith,
Bob Hatfield
Dear Bob,
This is the first compassionate reply I've seen in all this back and forth.
Now, if only Jim Nelson were as generous and thoughtful. Unfortunately, I only detect underlying insecurity in the man that makes him unable to bend, bless the constructive feedback, and enlarge his vision and compacity to love. As such, I cannot relate to him as my spriritual leader.
With kind regards,
Patricia
Steve, while I could quibble over a phrase here - a characterization there - I won't, because the overall balance and palpable sincerity of your thoughts below confirm your statement "We are people who loved this congregation". I will miss having your honest, intelligent and committed presence.
If the past tense verb "loved' could (perhaps) be more accurately stated in the present, the transformative power that love offers to all could enable you (and others) to continue working with us to maintain momentum toward evolutionary improvements. There is more that binds and connects us at UUCF than there is anything that should drive us apart. This is one member of "the leadership" (and I do not think I am alone) for whom your feeling (with my editorial insertion) "The central question as I see it is whether the leadership is capable of viewing (constructive) criticism as negative energy that can be converted to positive uses" resonates as something within our capacity and self-interest.
Best regards,
Bob Hatfield
"Happy congregations are all alike. Unhappy congregations are unhappy in their own special ways." (apologies to Leo Tolstoy)
[Click here for the rest of this letter by Steve Clapp.]