Some Good Reads
UU Minister Marilyn Sewell has a discussion with the famous atheist Christopher Hitchens here. It's worth the read, as is her blog post about the discussion here.
The UUA has announced a new campaign against hate crimes, "Standing on the Side of Love." Hate crimes are definitely something we've had enough of in the last year: July 27, 2008: Jim David Adkisson enters the Tennessee Valley UU Church and kills two people and wounds more. He says in his manifesto , "This was a hate crime: I hate the damn left-wing liberals." May 31, 2009: Scott Roeder enters a Lutheran Church and kills Dr. George Tiller. He is quoted as saying on a blog, "Bleass [sic] everyone for attending and praying in May to bring justice to Tiller and the closing of his death camp." June 10, 2009: James Wenneker von Brunn enters the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and kills a guard. Von Brunn ran an anti-Semitic website and had connections to hate groups. What is striking about these three, in comparison to all the other horrible hate crimes that happen, is that they all took place in places that should be places of peace, where we hono
Comments
Did I wish youi a Happy New Year yet Rev. Cyn?
As a rule the only people who get attacked by The Emerson Avenger are people who have gone well out of their way to invite his strong public criticism. Personally I think that the Robin Edgar Sucks blog is a hoot and only serves as yet another Unitarian*Universalist *example* of the kind of demonizing and marginalizing malicious gossip that I have been dealing with for well over a decade now. It is a quite U*Useful U*U foil for me to *play* off of and I am doing just that of course. . .
I am sorry that the Unitarian*Universalist religious community got saddled with yet another public U*U "stink" to start the New Year off with. I am confident that the Robin Edgar Sucks blog will ultimately do more harm to the Unitarian*Universalist religious community than it will to me, especially since I can quite thoroughly rebutt and discredit most of what has been said about me on it. As I pointed out on The Emerson Avenger blog and in private and confidential "electronic communications" with other UUs, the gossipy attacks on the Robin Edgar blog are actually rather tame, even quite lame, compared to the harmful attacks that I have been subjected to by "less than excellent" UU clergy that have been effectively condoned by both the UUA and MFC for years now. If you have any suggestions as to how I can successfully persuade the UUA and MFC to finally get around to freely and responsibly apologizing to me for allowing UU ministers to engage in far worse demonizing and marginalizing slander and libel against me I am all ears.
I hold out some faint hope that perhaps the Rev. Peter Morales' UUA administration will do the proverbial right thing later this year, hopefully by the 2010 UUA GA, but bitter past experience of the UUA and MFC does not allow me to *expect* it to do so in the sense of believing that it actually will do so. Of course I *can* and do *expect* it to do so in the other sense of the word *expect*. It certainly will be a happy new year for me *if* the UUA and MFC formally apologize to me for allowing intolerant and/or verbally and psychologically abusive UU ministers to deeply insult and harmfully defame me* with complete impunity aka zero accountability.
* To say nothing of rather too many other people of inherent worth and a modicum of dignity who have been insulted and defamed or otherwise verbally abused by abusive UU clergy.
P.S. If this public response to your comments here is a bit *too* hot for you to handle feel free to consider it to be a private message that you may share with other UUs as you see fit.
:I remain in the camp of people who want to open up words and meanings, generally speaking.
So am I as a rule but when opening up the meanings of certain words, perhaps especially names of groups, makes them effectively meaningless one has gone too far.
:I don't use "Christian" to define myself, usually, without further clarification.
I do not use "Christian" to define myself either. On the contrary I often make it clear that I am not a Christian to those who ask if I am a Christian or misrepresent me as being a Christian.
:I'll sometimes say something like "culturally Christian" or "christian-with-a-little-c" or "Christian, in that the Bible is my main religious text of reference and my cultural heritage, although my theology is.... and my christology is...."
The Bible (minus the New Testament of course) is the main religious text of reference and cultural heritage of Jews too, it figures to some extent in Islam as well. Using the Bible as one's main religious text of reference and cultural heritage does not make one a Christian any more than it makes one a Jew. Again, if anyone's "Christology" is not based on Jesus of Nazareth being the Christ it is not Christ*ology in any meaningful sense of the word.
:I'm unwilling, however, to say that the word "Christian" is exclusive of Unitarian Christianity.
I would be too. One can be a Unitarian and a Christian if one believes that Jesus actually was the Christ but disbelieve the doctrine of the Trinity etc. I would be just as unwilling to say that the word "Christian" is exclusive of the Christianity of Jehovah's Witnesses but AFAIAC Unitarians who do not believe that Jesus was the Christ should have the honesty and integrity not to *pretend* that they are Christians in any meaningful sense of the word Christ*ian.
Thanks for publicly posting that somewhat "hot" comment. As always it is genuinely appreciated.
Would that more UU ministers were prepared to do likewise. OTOH hand I am actually quite favorably impressed with the fact that fewer and fewer UU ministers are censoring and suppressing my critical comments posted to their blogs these days. There is hope for the UU World yet. :-)
Best Regards,
Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger
I appreciate that you're understanding and respectful about when I refuse to publish some "hot" comments. If it's directly attacking another minister, I'm not usually going to publish. OTOH, a general critique of the system I usually will. I've generally "allowed" statements critical of the UUA President's responsiveness, even though that could fall under the non-publishing category. That's a fine line, and I may not always consistently draw my lines, since it's a judgment call on each post I moderate, to some degree.
Well, it's why I don't usually use the word. I think something like Jesusian would be more appropriate for someone who follows the teaching of Jesus without thinking that he was a) God or b) specially and particularly annointed by God in a way not true for 100% of humanity. But Jesusian isn't a word, except in the Urban Dictionary where it says it means "1. Possessing qualities or being similiar to Jesus, often describing one's beard." In this sense, I'm definitely not Jesusian.
In other words, a Confucian follows the teaching of Confucius without thinking he was God. A Marxist follows the teaching of Marx without thinking he was God. A Buddhist follows the teachings of the Buddha without thinking he was God. What is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus without thinking he was God?
To the best of my recollection I always understanding and respectful of UU ministers not publishing *some* particularly "hot" comments. Certainly since becoming aware of the "Code of Silence" written into the UUMA Guidelines I have understood why most if not all UU ministers will not post comments that are directly critical of a colleague. OTOH I have little respect for that "Code of Silence" and believe that it should be significantly modified or completely eliminated from the UUMA Guidelines.
Gotta go. . .